Pacer and Sprinter replacement

[WatcherZero]

Level Boarding?

You mean like it is on the 185s with a 50ft gap to the platform?

Depends on the station, part of the problem is platforms were historically built by different companies for different train heights and while we have a nominally standardised height and gap now many platforms vary wildly and only properly comply when their rebuilt or heavily refurbished. Part of the reason Sprinters are considered possibly compliable is their bogie design allows for some height alteration, unlike the Pacers. A platform gap problem for a unusually narrow unit (for example tapering near carriage end) can be addressed simply through adding a step at door height.

 

[jopsuk]

Any one know how they are going to deal with level boarding "sur le continent"?

...and if they don't have to, why do we?

Our Disability access laws may well be tougher than elsewhere by our own choice.

 

[northwichcat]

I should have claimed against them, whilst doing doors in the middle I fell down the gap at Staly before they fixed the platform edge, smashed up my kneecap. Especially when they spout all that If you can't do it safely don't do it! rubbish.

That's one reason why 'mind the gap' announcements shouldn't be put in to PIS for all stations. Stalybridge has/had a big gap but when the PIS system warns about the gap at every station stop people are expecting a big gap.

 

[Rhydgaled]

I thought EMUs for the ValleyLines would be a mix of 2-car and 3-car, corridor fitted, units. That way, they could run in multiple (4-car, 5-car and 6-car trains) in the peaks up to the length of the platforms that were extended to 6-car, and run shorter trains (2-car and 3-car) off-peak to save a bit of electricity (with the 3-car sets running the services that use the GWML (Maesteg - Ebbw Vale, Swansea - Bristol and (hopefully) Swansea - Cheltenham) off-peak. Then again, is there enough space in Canton to store all the spare vehicles off-peak?

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned about Valleys electrification is that you'd have to build a Sprinter depot in Carmarthen or Llanelli, unless of course you (very stupidly) don't electrify to Swansea, in which case Landore could become the Sprinter depot.

 

[jopsuk]

True level boarding would only be possible with dead straight platforms and all stock the same width and floor height. the stock would also need to be designed without any steps down (for instance on class 365 Networkers there is a small drop between the internal floor and the external step). Plug type doors would have to move up before they move out- sliding doors are obviously OK.

Curving platforms naturally stop level boarding. Having multiple lengths and widths makes it worse, with end doors, 1/3 & 2/3 and 1/4 & 3/4 doors confounding the situation- though with straight platforms and a consistent width (length wouldn't matter as long as clearance on corners outside stations is generous enough to deal with everything) the door position would be immaterial.

 

[Buttsy]

Never mind sending them coaches south how about the Middlesbrough- Sunderland-Newcastle-Hexham-Carlisle getting a look in on an upgrade

Can I ask how you would solve the Sunderland-Heworth problem as that's currently electrified at 1500V dc?

 

[Rhydgaled]

Can I ask how you would solve the Sunderland-Heworth problem as that's currently electrified at 1500V dc?

Would dual voltage (25kv AC & 1500V DC) units be possible? Or just cascade them some more-modern DMUs to replace their Pacers.

 

[Nym]

It would be possibly to lay down 750V 3rd Rail to accompany the 1500V DC OHL but it would be silly IMO.

Dual Voltage auto-switchover stock would be the only realistic way to work that line IMO. But then it would be an expensive single use type of stock, unless it could run off both 750VDC 3rd Rail & OHL (I'm looking at you metrolink!) 1500V OHL, 25KV OHL and possibly even 630/750V 3rd/4th Rail (I'm looking at Chiltern Railways here) then an order for about 50 units could realistically be made and it would be worth building them.

Then all you need is isolators between the different types of OHL in place, and hey presto, sorted.

For the pantograph, a huge shunt detector (senses AC or DC) and some circuit breakers would work well enough, as would some trackside (CHANGE TO THIS) orders that where either auto or manual, preferably auto then it could instruct the breaker to open before or at the nutral point, then close again on a different breaker afterwould.

Of course, power electronics would mean that none of this would be nessesarry anyway, simply place a transformer directly in line with the feed, when it's DC nothing passes through, detect that and pull off the DC voltage on the LHS of the transformer, through a blocking inductance, so when it changes back to AC, the inductor is used to detect it's back on AC again and fire up the transformer set. All down to a 750V BusBar to make life easyer in the power electronics realm.

 

[HSTEd]

The Metro stock is meant to be coming up for renewal relatively soon, and Ive been thinking about this alot because its always part of my HIGH SPEED NORTH EAST thought experiments that help me through my summer job's shifts in the freezer.

You could purchase dual voltage vehicles for the TW Metro to work that line and then concentrate the remaining single voltage units on the other line of the metro for the remaining few years they have before retirement.
Once this is achieved you can convert the electrification to 25kV.

 

[anthony263]

I thought EMUs for the ValleyLines would be a mix of 2-car and 3-car, corridor fitted, units. That way, they could run in multiple (4-car, 5-car and 6-car trains) in the peaks up to the length of the platforms that were extended to 6-car, and run shorter trains (2-car and 3-car) off-peak to save a bit of electricity (with the 3-car sets running the services that use the GWML (Maesteg - Ebbw Vale, Swansea - Bristol and (hopefully) Swansea - Cheltenham) off-peak. Then again, is there enough space in Canton to store all the spare vehicles off-peak?

One thing that I don't think has been mentioned about Valleys electrification is that you'd have to build a Sprinter depot in Carmarthen or Llanelli, unless of course you (very stupidly) don't electrify to Swansea, in which case Landore could become the Sprinter depot.

You can't get a 2 carriage AC emu. I think the mininmum is 3 carriages which is what was prpopsed for the valley lines with the carriages length being 23m compared to 19/20m for the current pacers. I suspect that this would allow for some 6 carriage trains during the peaks on services to/from Rhymney/Treherbert which would help to reduce overcrowding a lot on those routes especially between Pontypridd/Caerphilly & Cardiff

 

[ainsworth74]

You can't get a 2 carriage AC emu.

Why not? You can get 2-car DC EMUs and surely a DMSO-DPTSO formation would work?

 

[anthony263]

Why not? You can get 2-car DC EMUs and surely a DMSO-DPTSO formation would work?

I meant you could get a 2 carriage AC emu at the current time. I suppose a design could be available in the future

 

[Ivo]

19/20m for the current pacers

I thought Pacers were only ~15m long per car?

 

[tbtc]

Why not? You can get 2-car DC EMUs and surely a DMSO-DPTSO formation would work?

Agreed - I think it'd be perfectly possible - the reason that there are no 2-car AC EMUs built is simply because EMU lines tend to be busy lines that can justify longer trains.

There is a question of whether its really worth building one/two coach units of *any* type though (given the cost of building units/ the space taken for cabs/ the space taken for disabled toilets etc).

 

[sprinterguy]

I thought Pacers were only ~15m long per car?

They are indeed; Around 15.5 metres per carriage, it varies slightly between classes. It's the 150s that have 20m carriages.

 

[northwichcat]

You can't get a 2 carriage AC emu. I think the mininmum is 3 carriages which is what was prpopsed for the valley lines with the carriages length being 23m compared to 19/20m for the current pacers. I suspect that this would allow for some 6 carriage trains during the peaks on services to/from Rhymney/Treherbert which would help to reduce overcrowding a lot on those routes especially between Pontypridd/Caerphilly & Cardiff

A 323 with 23m carriages has more than double the number of seats of a pair of Pacers with 15.5m and the original 3+2 seating. So if you think a pair of ATW's 142s, which have less seats than at build, could cope then a 3 car EMU could easily cope. A 6 car EMU with 23m carriages would be equivalent to 4 Pacers joined up in terms of seating capacity.

 

[Ivo]

As much as I disprove of the idea, wouldn't that then strengthen the argument for 357s? Roughly 80m on a platform designed to hold 6 Pacer vehicles totalling around 92m? Capacity wise, the 357 would have nearly treble the seating availability as well, and a more sensible 3+2 plan.

 

[anthony263]

As much as I disprove of the idea, wouldn't that then strengthen the argument for 357s? Roughly 80m on a platform designed to hold 6 Pacer vehicles totalling around 92m? Capacity wise, the 357 would have nearly treble the seating availability as well, and a more sensible 3+2 plan.

I dont have any argument against having the class 357's although the 3 + 2 seating would have to be replaced. That said a 4 carriage class 357 would be a bit much for the Coryton - Cardiff - Radyr service which is supposed to be getting extended to Pontypridd, that said whats to say there wont be a massive increase in passenger numbers.

Electrification would also allow for trains to call at 2 new stations at Roath & Energlyn as well as a new station at Brackla.

I am not sure if there really should be a new station opened at St Fagans, at least with the station at Brackla it will in a loop so trains can be overtaken.

I wouldnt mind seing the Pontyclun - Beddau branch re-opened (tram anyone?)

 

[Kneedown]

You arent going to get Swiss style electrification in this country, the political framework and current structure of the industry does not support it

Why not? All it would take would be a change of mindset and the ability for the powers that be to see the realities of the future beyond the next General Election.

 

[Rhydgaled]

Is there a map available on the web which shows the names of all the junctions? I ask this because I'd like to know exactly which lines are being looked at as TPE North electrification for CP5 in NR's Initial Industry Plan.

I've tried to make up an electrification programme (a very wild guestimate I must admit) through to 2020 and haven't managed to get enough stock released to replace all Pacers (I think there would be about 24 left over) without another electrification team, but maybe TPE north wiring would change that.

The IIP seems to suggest that the Valleys programme wouldn't be complete by 2020. I get this impression because I believe it suggested the north-west team (which only seems able to manage 25 miles a year, compared to the claimed 1mile-per-night rate of the 'high output' GWML factory train team) would be the one to do the Valleys. Assuming the north-west schemes are finishing in 2017, that team would have only 2 or 3 years (50 or 75 miles) to wire the Valleys.

 

[northwichcat]

I've tried to make up an electrification programme (a very wild guestimate I must admit) through to 2020 and haven't managed to get enough stock released to replace all Pacers (I think there would be about 24 left over) without another electrification team, but maybe TPE north wiring would change that.

The IIP seems to suggest that the Valleys programme wouldn't be complete by 2020.

There's 140 Pacers in service and you've got 116 of them being replaced without including North TPE and Valley Lines electrification?! If so you've got something completely wrong.

On paper less than 10 DMUs will be freed up and not redeployed elsewhere as a result of North West and Thames Valley electrification schemes. However, if passenger numbers continue to grow then there wouldn't even be one unit available to write off.

 

[Rhydgaled]

There's 140 Pacers in service and you've got 116 of them being replaced without including North TPE and Valley Lines electrification?! If so you've got something completely wrong.

On paper less than 10 DMUs will be freed up and not redeployed elsewhere as a result of North West and Thames Valley electrification schemes. However, if passenger numbers continue to grow then there wouldn't even be one unit available to write off.

You mis-understand. I've made up a rolling programme of electrification using three teams, one third rail one doing 25miles per year, the north-west one doing 25miles per year and the GWML one doing about 150miles per year.

With that, I've included a whole bunch of routes, including the ValleyLines (done by the GWML team, not as the IIP suggests the north-west team who don't have enough time to finish the job by 2020 if they continue at 25 miles per year) but not TPE north (ran out of years before 2020).

In detail, the Pacer replacment programme I made up was:

• ValleyLines - 30 Pacers directly replaced by EMUs, 8 Pacers with FGW replaced by 8 150s from the Valleys
• 16 Pacers replaced by cascading 165s from Paddington to Oxford/Reading electrification to Newcastle area services
• 3 Pacers replaced by electrifiying to Buxton
• 23 Pacers replaced by electrfying Cardiff - Nottingham, Hereford - Birmingham and Birmingham - Rugely Trent Valley and cascading 170s
• 7 Pacers replaced by ordering more 172s for LM and cascading the rest of their Sprinters to Northen
• 5 Pacers replaced by electrifying Leeds - Harrogate - York
• 8 Pacers replaced by electrfication to cascade London Overground's 172s
• 16 Pacers replaced by electrifying Southern's last two diesel routes and cascading the 171s

Now, if I knew exactly which routes were planned as part of TPE north, I could have a look to see if replacing some of the schemes listed above with TPE north would enable more Pacers to be replaced by 2020.

 

[northwichcat]

You mis-understand. I've made up a rolling programme of electrification using three teams, one third rail one doing 25miles per year, the north-west one doing 25miles per year and the GWML one doing about 150miles per year.

With that, I've included a whole bunch of routes, including the ValleyLines (done by the GWML team, not as the IIP suggests the north-west team who don't have enough time to finish the job by 2020 if they continue at 25 miles per year) but not TPE north (ran out of years before 2020).

In detail, the Pacer replacment programme I made up was:

• ValleyLines - 30 Pacers directly replaced by EMUs, 8 Pacers with FGW replaced by 8 150s from the Valleys
• 3 Pacers replaced by electrifiying to Buxton

Now, if I knew exactly which routes were planned as part of TPE north, I could have a look to see if replacing some of the schemes listed above with TPE north would enable more Pacers to be replaced by 2020.

OK a bit of an unusual plan considering Network Rail's plan for the next CP does include North TPE electrification, subject to government funding. Yet Buxton-Hazel Grove has effectively been ruled out as the line needs a 2tph off peak frequency to justify the cost of electrification and an increase in off-peak frequency isn't that likely. The Manchester Hub document states extending Hazel Grove terminators to Chinley is a preferred option over extending to Buxton so a short stretch of OHE may be needed between Hazel Grove and Chinley but it wouldn't free up any Pacers as it would be to give Chinley an enhanced service.

Even if only part of North TPE or the Valley Lines are done by the end of 2019 it would mean some Pacers could be replaced as a direct result of the electrification projects.

 

[Anvil1984]

Stupid question (as always) but could any sprinters be replaced (even if its only a couple) via the central belt electrifcation in Scotland with some DMUs being sent down south of the border.

 

[Nym]

Replaced by central belt electrification yes...

Cascaded out of Scotland... No chance!

 

[Anvil1984]

Could they not spare us a couple of 156s that was the thinking but probably not they'll find another use for them

 

[ainsworth74]

Could they not spare us a couple of 156s that was the thinking but probably not they'll find another use for them

Not until all 158s and 156s are diagrammed with 6-car formations will we see them leave Scotland. Or at least that's what the cynic in me thinks.

Hopefully, however, once EGIP comes to pass 170s will be cascaded onto other lines in Scotland and will release many of the 158s or 156s that currently operate on those services. Certainly there are more than enough 170s (59 3-car units) to replace all the 158s (46 2-car units) or 156s (48 2-car units) north of the border.

 

[WatcherZero]

Ultimatley the single car Sprinter is doomed, to meet the requirements for a disabled toilet without losing a high ratio of seating they would have be permanently coupled in pairs.

 

[HSTEd]

Indeed, 153s will have to be collapsed down into 155s again during the DDA rebuild otherwise they make no sense capacity wise.

Atleast that will press the issue of new DMUs.

 

[Class172]

Lines currently operated by a single 153s would be replaced by a 150. The 153s would be reformed into Class 155s which would operate on the less crowded but longer distance 150 duties.