Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 15:15 06 Dec 2022
* December train strikes: Union told not to hold country 'to ransom'
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 30/03/23 - Railfuture Annual, Leeds

On this day
6th Dec (1897)
London becomes first city to host licensed taxi cabs

Train RunningShort Run
10:55 Truro to London Paddington
12:04 London Paddington to Truro
13:30 Cardiff Central to Portsmouth Harbour
16:04 London Paddington to Truro
16:55 Truro to London Paddington
20:24 Exmouth to Cardiff Central
Delayed
14:18 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
14:40 Gloucester to Westbury
PollsThere are no open or recent polls
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
December 06, 2022, 03:17:20 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[115] Advent Quiz - December 2022
[86] Rail unions strike action 2022/2023
[56] Stanier Black Five, 44871 to Sherborne and Yeovil Junction, 6t...
[49] Sir Nigel Gresley railtour 5th December '22
[41] Drayton Green
[39] End date for Castles - initially a Rumour Mill thread
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Pacers are no more.  (Read 4938 times)
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 6526


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: June 03, 2021, 11:23:13 pm »

This does not look like anything other than an early days start up - it shares its office address with Startford upon Avon Citizens Advice Bureau.

Could there be something more useful if they were designed to be two car units, with perhaps a capacity of 120+ (assuming that space released by deleting inner cabs is released for seats)?

We'll know that it's a chimera when the next Go-op proposal is for them to be used on their next wishful route proposal..........

More relevantly, the address is that of loads of companies linked to Rupert Symons, a patent agent, and  director of VLR Technologies Ltd. All the real work will be done in the various collaborating companies, which are:
    TDI
    EVERSHOLT RAIL
    WMG
    CUMMINS
    RDM GROUP
    TRANSCAL
    RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board)
    PROSE

Eversholt talk as if they expect to buy the final product in numbers, but describe the first one as a demonstrator - so we still don't know how close they think that is to a real product. Cummins's presence may explain the use of diesel power, though perhaps not the lack of future decarbonic alternatives. They (Cummins) are thinking quite hard about their strategy in this area, though seem to be uncertain as to what will work in trains in the future. 
 
« Last Edit: June 08, 2021, 06:00:28 pm by stuving » Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5088



View Profile
« Reply #16 on: June 08, 2021, 03:31:23 pm »

I can the merit in lightweight bus-like rail vehicles for secondary routes, including commuter services on the Minehead branch and similar places.
Toilets are in my view a requirement even for very short journeys, and that in turn means a disabled toilet, which suggests the need for either two vehicles or a long and articulated vehicle.

I appreciate that most buses do not have toilets, but bus passengers can alight to relieve themselves, whereas the policy on trains is "keep them on the trains no matter what" Remember the Lewisham stranding and the appalling conditions suffered by victims on board trains "that don't need toilets for journeys of less than 30 minutes"

With the concerns about climate change, I agree that we should not be building any more rail vehicles with diesel engines, with the possible exception of nominally electric vehicles with a small diesel engine for use when the wires come down.
Battery power is now a realistic alternative.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2021, 09:16:28 pm by broadgage » Logged

A proper intercity train has a minimum of 8 coaches, gangwayed throughout, with first at one end, and a full sized buffet car between first and standard.
It has space for cycles, surfboards,luggage etc.
A 5 car DMU (Diesel Multiple Unit) is not a proper inter-city train. The 5+5 and 9 car DMUs are almost as bad.
jamestheredengine
Transport Scholar
Sr. Member
******
Posts: 282


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2021, 08:31:00 pm »

I can the merit in lightweight bus-like rail vehicles for secondary routes
The problem is that so many of the obvious routes for this sort of thing were shut down in the 60s. Neath Riverside to Hereford via Brecon is the one that immediately springs to mind for me. I'd quite enjoy a ride up to Brecon or Hay in something like that.
Logged

Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3971


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: June 09, 2021, 08:50:33 pm »

Toilets are in my view a requirement even for very short journeys, and that in turn means a disabled toilet, which suggests the need for either two vehicles or a long and articulated vehicle.
I agree on the need for toilets. However, I question whether that means a need for two vehicles. It's not a case of "toilet" and "disabled toilet"; a toilet accessible to the disabled will also be accessible to the abled. The rail-bus simply needs to be a reasonable size to have one toilet accessible to all, and many or most coaches manage this in a length of 12 metres, so it shouldn't be a problem.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 37326



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #19 on: June 09, 2021, 09:18:01 pm »

I can the merit in lightweight bus-like rail vehicles for secondary routes
The problem is that so many of the obvious routes for this sort of thing were shut down in the 60s. Neath Riverside to Hereford via Brecon is the one that immediately springs to mind for me. I'd quite enjoy a ride up to Brecon or Hay in something like that.

I worry about routes that only support single vehicle trains - the Bubble cars used to be known as "Coffin Nails" because the next step was closure.  But I am VERY thankful for the 153s that ran on the TransWilts for a handful of years until our traffic outgrew them.

Wouldn't it be lovely to see some re-openings in Wales - and some growth on existing lines - but really the aspiration should be a traffic level to require trains of 2 carriages at least.   I'm noting that Prof Stuart Cole, who knows a thing or four about trains and buses, advocates a rise to a two hourly service on the Heart of Wales, and with something at least twice as long as a 153.

As part routes providing the outer end, or where multiple routes fan out, there might just be a place for these - Swansea to Clarbeston Road where the hourly train divides, portions to Fishguard, Milford Haven and Neyland perhaps?
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, and on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest.
TonyN
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 441



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: October 09, 2021, 03:10:48 pm »

The RLVR vehicle now has a Demonstrator setup at Ironbridge.

https://transportdesigninternational.com/launching-revolution-very-light-rail-rvlr/
Logged
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4229


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: October 09, 2021, 07:53:16 pm »

The RLVR vehicle now has a Demonstrator setup at Ironbridge.

https://transportdesigninternational.com/launching-revolution-very-light-rail-rvlr/

What is its crash resistance like?
Logged
Electric train
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3929


The future is 25000 Volts AC 750V DC has its place


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: October 10, 2021, 07:51:26 am »

The RLVR vehicle now has a Demonstrator setup at Ironbridge.

https://transportdesigninternational.com/launching-revolution-very-light-rail-rvlr/

What is its crash resistance like?

As it has RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board), DfT» (Department for Transport - about) backing I would expect it to be fully compliant.
Logged

Neither a wise man nor a brave man lies down on the tracks of history to wait for the train of the future to run over him.     
Dwight D. Eisenhower
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4229


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: October 10, 2021, 08:19:37 am »

The RLVR vehicle now has a Demonstrator setup at Ironbridge.

https://transportdesigninternational.com/launching-revolution-very-light-rail-rvlr/

What is its crash resistance like?

As it has RSSB (Rail Safety and Standards Board), DfT» (Department for Transport - about) backing I would expect it to be fully compliant.

Compliant with what standard?

What I meant was - does being a very light rail mean there is a reduced requirement for crash resistance or is it expected to acheive the same as heavy rail?
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 6526


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: October 10, 2021, 11:21:56 am »

Compliant with what standard?

What I meant was - does being a very light rail mean there is a reduced requirement for crash resistance or is it expected to acheive the same as heavy rail?

They seem to have ducked that question. As a demonstrator it can be made without formal requirements in all areas, on a "lets see how far we can go with the innovative bits" basis. The trials are planned to use "a segregated alignment (a route protected from interaction with roads, cars and other traffic)". I note that the design includes actual buffers, no doubt to put some explicit energy absorption mechanism into a composite structure that provides very little implicitly.

Going back to the subject of bogies, not resolved earlier on, they are not using any fancy new carbon-fibre ones. That was a parallel project with its own timescale and timescale risks, so I can see they would not want to be coupled to it. If that works it would no doubt give a further weight reduction.

They are in fact using the LN25 bogie, which is basically the same old TF25 bogie used on big goods wagons since 2001. It's made by Axiom, originally Powell Duffryn rail and now part of Wabtec Faively. So I don't imagine it's at all light, even before they attached motors and/or couplings to it.
Logged
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1973


From station to station, back to Bristol city....


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: September 15, 2022, 06:36:28 pm »

As a quick update on the Pacers in preservation, it seems that the units that went to the Wensleydale Railway have now been purchased by the Weardale railway.  A few more details below.

https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2022/09/weardale-railway-purchases-wensleydale-railway-based-class-142-pacer-train.html
Logged
infoman
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 886


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: September 16, 2022, 07:47:23 am »

What would be the cost of buying these units?
Logged
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1973


From station to station, back to Bristol city....


View Profile
« Reply #27 on: September 16, 2022, 11:21:32 pm »

What would be the cost of buying these units?

I don't know if the Weardale railway website has any details on this but it might appear later in their published annual accounts.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page