metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 19, 2013 17:55:48 GMT
I have heard a rumour, and it's only a rumour, that there is the option to add to or replace the 172s on this line with 3 car Pacers! The cars are shorter than the current offering and therefore an extra car can be used. This would provide a stop gap till electrification. Chiltern railways would then take on the spare 172s for their Chiltern Metro service from West Ruislip.
|
|
|
Post by christopher125 on May 19, 2013 18:38:40 GMT
Sounds like a wind-up - apart from it offering little or no benefit, with all such units accounted for elsewhere anyway, I believe the various Pacer classes are banned from operating over the third rail which would surely prevent them accessing Willesden depot.
Chris
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,235
|
Post by rincew1nd on May 19, 2013 19:20:05 GMT
I'm not sure when the Chat Moss services are switching to electric (the wires are already up on some sections) but there'll be some spare Pacers then. You guys down south could have them all then, afterall Pacers seem to be DfT's answer to overcrowding in the north, surely the same answer to the same question down south? No?
|
|
Rich32
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 1,506
|
Post by Rich32 on May 19, 2013 19:27:02 GMT
TBH the Class 172's are so overcrowded in the peaks these days, I think, if only as a stop-gap until electrification, most commuters would welcome 3-car pacers.
|
|
|
Post by sawb on May 19, 2013 19:40:24 GMT
Travel on a 3 car pacer? I'd rather swallow live wasps!
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on May 19, 2013 19:45:07 GMT
I am doubtful as to wether Mr & Ms. London Punter will enjoy the Pacer's superb ride quality, ease of access and large space for both standing and seated passangers! But on a more serious note, If this were to go ahead, a refurbishment would be needed (especially if the units are going to be ex-Northern!), but would this be cost effective considering that all pacers must be retired by the end of 2019. And that little fact might even indicate that the electrification is going to happen fairly soon!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2013 19:47:02 GMT
Travel on a 3 car pacer? I'd rather swallow live wasps! That would be a buzz ..... (sorry!!)
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on May 19, 2013 20:52:07 GMT
I'm not sure when the Chat Moss services are switching to electric (the wires are already up on some sections) but there'll be some spare Pacers then. I thought the only 3-car Pacers were the class 144s operating in Yorkshire (paid for by West Yorks PTE), although I suppose there could be a reshuffle. Why are Pacers banned from 3rd rail territory? How do they manage at Southport and Hunts Cross?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2013 20:56:55 GMT
Pacer, not DC or AC, more a clapped out Bus!
XF
|
|
|
Post by metrailway on May 19, 2013 21:29:06 GMT
I'm not sure when the Chat Moss services are switching to electric (the wires are already up on some sections) but there'll be some spare Pacers then. I thought the only 3-car Pacers were the class 144s operating in Yorkshire (paid for by West Yorks PTE), although I suppose there could be a reshuffle. Why are Pacers banned from 3rd rail territory? How do they manage at Southport and Hunts Cross? I believe the 3rd rail in Merseyside is at a lower height when compared to the Southern Region.
|
|
Fahad
In memoriam
Posts: 459
|
Post by Fahad on May 19, 2013 21:44:39 GMT
At the end of the day, more trains are more trains, and I think that most commuters would warmly welcome the increase in capacity! I thought the only 3-car Pacers were the class 144s operating in Yorkshire (paid for by West Yorks PTE), although I suppose there could be a reshuffle. Why are Pacers banned from 3rd rail territory? How do they manage at Southport and Hunts Cross? I believe the 3rd rail in Merseyside is at a lower height when compared to the Southern Region. By many accounts this is only an enthusiasts' myth. Pacers used to run on the Heart of Wessex line, including over SRDC at Weymouth.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on May 20, 2013 0:47:58 GMT
Is there much of a capacity increase in running 3 fourwheeled vehicles instead of two bogie carriages?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,414
|
Post by Chris M on May 20, 2013 1:23:35 GMT
Based on this FOI response Northern's three-car Class 144s can carry 148 or 222 people, depending on configuration. A two-car 150/1 has a capacity of 204 people (same source). Finding a figure for the 172s has proved rather trickier, but this Rail Magazine article states They have capacity for "230 passengers (including standing), while the Class 150s have space for 198." This would suggest that a three-car pacer has less capacity than a 2-car Class 172, and so not something that would benefit the line.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2013 7:17:29 GMT
TBH the Class 172's are so overcrowded in the peaks these days, I think, if only as a stop-gap until electrification, most commuters would welcome 3-car pacers. C'mon Mate, do you know what you're saying? A 3-car Pacer would have less capacity than a 172/0. The only possibility is that some may become available to supplement the 172s. A Pacer is a 2-axle railbus!! You may be thinking of Sprinters, eg Class 150 etc.
|
|
Rich32
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 1,506
|
Post by Rich32 on May 20, 2013 8:29:30 GMT
TBH the Class 172's are so overcrowded in the peaks these days, I think, if only as a stop-gap until electrification, most commuters would welcome 3-car pacers. C'mon Mate, do you know what you're saying? A 3-car Pacer would have less capacity than a 172/0. The only possibility is that some may become available to supplement the 172s. A Pacer is a 2-axle railbus!! You may be thinking of Sprinters, eg Class 150 etc. Class 170/0 - 120 seats per unit Class 144 - 145+6 tip-up Add in to that 6 doors on a 144 as opposed to 4 on a 172, ergo decreased dwell time.
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on May 20, 2013 9:49:19 GMT
C'mon Mate, do you know what you're saying? A 3-car Pacer would have less capacity than a 172/0. The only possibility is that some may become available to supplement the 172s. A Pacer is a 2-axle railbus!! You may be thinking of Sprinters, eg Class 150 etc. Class 170/0 - 120 seats per unit Class 144 - 145+6 tip-up Add in to that 6 doors on a 144 as opposed to 4 on a 172, ergo decreased dwell time. I don't know where you got those numbers from but the quoted seats for the 172/0 (not a three car class 170/0) are 124 (60+64 from Platform 5's rolling stock book). The Chiltern units have more seats at 145 (65 + 80). The number of seats is not really relevant for overcrowded services like these, as important is the length of the units. Also, the 144s don't have 6 door per side, but only 5 (the end vehicles have two doors on one side and one on the other). The class 172/0 have 2 x 23.62 m vehicles = 47.2 m per unit The class 144 have 2 x 15.45 m + 1 x 15.43 m vehicles = 46.3 m per unit. The positioning of the doors at the extreme end of the class 144 coaches will reduce any advantage of having more doors as they will not be spread out evenly along the train. They also open inwards, taking up more valuable standing room. Edit to add the followingAlso, of course, the class 172 has wheelchair spaces which are absent in the class 144 and this also eats into their seating capacity. The class 144 are really not suitable for wheelchairs in their current format, as there is a small internal step up from the doorway into the main body of the unit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2013 12:47:22 GMT
How about getting some old 4 wheeled coaches from the Met to run the service!
XF
|
|
Fahad
In memoriam
Posts: 459
|
Post by Fahad on May 20, 2013 13:08:23 GMT
A cl144 is 2.8m wide externally whereas a cl172 is just 2.69m. Furthermore, the Pacer has a thinner body, meaning that more of the width is usable, internally. This should translate to at least two more standing passengers per "row"
|
|
|
Post by andypurk on May 20, 2013 13:21:42 GMT
A cl144 is 2.8m wide externally whereas a cl172 is just 2.69m. Furthermore, the Pacer has a thinner body, meaning that more of the width is usable, internally. This should translate to at least two more standing passengers per "row" 11 cm isn't much extra room for more standing passengers and you certainly wouldn't get any more in the central passageway between the seats. Any slight gain would have to be set against the space lost with the extra gangway in a 3 car class 144 unit.
|
|
|
Post by christopher125 on May 20, 2013 14:45:03 GMT
Couldn't they fit longitudinal seating to the current fleet as a stop-gap measure?
Chris
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on May 20, 2013 16:10:11 GMT
All this assumes that, even if desirable (and what could be less desirable than a ride in a Pacer?), the Merseyside ones will be being released to any reasonable timescale; they still appear to be tied into a cascade that starts with the release of the 319s from TLK and that in turn depends on actually signing the deal with Siemens - now only nearly a year late thanks to the mattoids in DfT who had thought up the ultimate risk transfer mechanism - one so cool that no one really wanted it... If DfT don't get a move on, there's a serious risk either that the upgrade will open with only the existing stock or the new stock will not have been tested sufficiently. [There's a rumour going round that the underbidder hasn't put away all his old files just yet but that would do nothing for delivery timescales].
GH
|
|
slugabed
Zu lang am schnuller.
Posts: 1,480
|
Post by slugabed on May 20, 2013 16:56:47 GMT
Graham,today you taught me a new word I had never,ever heard before....Mattoid....I had to look it up!
|
|
|
Post by nickf on May 20, 2013 17:02:32 GMT
Graham,today you taught me a new word I had never,ever heard before....Mattoid....I had to look it up! Me too! I shall enjoy using it.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 20, 2013 17:16:05 GMT
I'd love to see a 144 with the LO livery. The insides would need a deep clean but it could be done.
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on May 20, 2013 17:18:27 GMT
Servus
- a standard term for describing Treasury officials behind their backs in Whitehall.
G
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,235
|
Post by rincew1nd on May 20, 2013 18:20:33 GMT
I'd love to see a 144 with the LO livery. The insides would need a deep clean but it could be done. Any Photoshop whizzes out there fancy giving it a go?
|
|
|
Post by nickf on May 20, 2013 18:33:37 GMT
Servus - a standard term for describing Treasury officials behind their backs in Whitehall. G Servus; Latin for a slave (2nd declension masculine, goes like dominus). Latin also has Serva (1st declension, feminine, goes like mensa) a female slave.
|
|
Fahad
In memoriam
Posts: 459
|
Post by Fahad on May 20, 2013 18:34:09 GMT
Another benefit is the increased height of Pacers compared to 172s - 3.86m as opposed to 3.77m. The difference in the usable internal height is even greater, due to the absence of unnecessary cruft, such as air conditioning, or bogies. This could be put to extremely good use by stacking passengers vertically!
|
|
|
Post by grahamhewett on May 20, 2013 19:35:12 GMT
Servus - a standard term for describing Treasury officials behind their backs in Whitehall. G Servus; Latin for a slave (2nd declension masculine, goes like dominus). Latin also has Serva (1st declension, feminine, goes like mensa) a female slave. Also the formally jocular greeting of one Austro-Hungarian imperial official when addressing a colleague (and still used facetiously by waiters in country restaurants...) G
|
|
|
Post by christopher125 on May 20, 2013 22:03:59 GMT
All this assumes that, even if desirable (and what could be less desirable than a ride in a Pacer?), the Merseyside ones will be being released to any reasonable timescale; they still appear to be tied into a cascade that starts with the release of the 319s from TLK and that in turn depends on actually signing the deal with Siemens... Thankfully this issue should be addressed by news reported late last year - not only did Southern secure an add-on order of Dual Voltage 5-car units but are tendering on the DfT's behalf the equivalent of 54 DV units which could be used directly or indirectly to cascade sufficient 319's. That said, apparently the deal is in the process of being signed off by the lawyers so fingers crossed we don't have much longer to wait. Chris
|
|