142 unsafe

[markh]

watching looknorth last night & a item came up saying that the class 142 is unsafe & is 5 years ovder its expected lifespan on some saying the engine has falied & the drive shaft snaped
notheren are wanting to scrap them but theres a shortage of replacement units

are any preserved

[kieranhardy]

I don't see how they are over their life span when according to Wiki (pinch of salt) some refurbishments were taken out in 2008. They all have to be withdrawn by 2019 though under the Disability Discrimination Act as they don't have access for disabled people.

None are preserved but this isn't surprising as out of 96 trainsets built, 94 are still running with the remaining 2 scrapped. I'm not a fan of them anyway though they are probably very useful for a heritage railways needs.

[poliss]

The engines didn't just fail. They fell out as they were going along according to Look North. Theresa Villiers says they're safe, so that's all right.

[b308]

Not that uncommon with underslung engines, most other units with similar drive have suffered the same, usually just c**p maintenance... Any unit with shaft drives can and does suffer the same issues... Would be very unlucky if it caused a major accident though...

Think most commuters would be glad to see the back of them, though! At 75mph they are positively awful to travel in... Would suit a preserved line, though... Someone is already ahead of you re preserving one!

http://pacer-preservation.webs.com/

[Bufferstop]

Perhaps we should pack them of to Iran like they did with the batch of 141s. No wonder they hate us.

[m8internet]

Not sure how they can claim a failed engine and/or seized drive shaft is unsafe
This is more of a mechanical fault, which can then be repaired
Furthermore, this type of mechanical failure can affect almost any other type of diesel train and remains quite safe
Finally, even during introduction the pacer family suffered severe mechanical faults, hence why they were renumbered as they were modified; reliability has never been their strong point

Perhaps they should refer to other documents which recommended the pacer family of units be withdrawn on safety grounds
Most obvious was an accident on the WCML, which should the design flaw in such units
However this has always been impractical, hence why the pacers now operate and are limited to where they are now

The pacers (along with many other such rolling stock) could be life extended beyond 2012 to meet DDA requirements
However does that make financial sense?
Not really, placing an order for new rolling stock is more practical, equally by then other units will be available which can be cascaded to those operators currently using pacers
ScotRail used to be operator with the worst DMUs, older units cascaded to them and then withdrawn, ironically it now looks like the opposite is taking place and its units now end up with other operators

There are vast amounts of electrification due to take place which will equally see a large amount of diesel power trains released
As an example :
FTPE should be able to release 10 Class 185 units from Scotland routes, however they are likely to retain these so in turn it will release 10 Class 170 units
ScotRail should be able to release 30 Class 156 units and a further 18 Class 170 units (it is likely the Class 170 units will be retained to release an equal number of Class 158 units)
That is just for starters...
The Class 156 units released could then be modified to meet the DDA requirements when they are returned to RoSCo
The Class 170 units released could then replaced Class 158 units with existing operators (such as Northern, Arriva Trains Wales, and FGW)

[poliss]

Class 142 ‘Pacer’ June 2009 The engine mounted under the floor of the second coach became detached and fell to the track, derailing the rear axle as it passed over.
http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cf ... 2009v2.pdf

[roadie stu]

I've travelled on 142's a few times and never felt safe in them, I suppose I'm used to travelling on the 165 units that are in my area,

cheers

Stu

[m8internet]

Similar thing happened to a Class 158 shortly after delivery
Any underframe equipment is liable to fall off, then end up under the wheels

[91125]

Here we go again

I'll ask the same question again "Can anyone confirm the number of people that have be killed in a pacer unit ?"

These units have been in service a good number years and several have had some nasty conflicting movements, BUT refer to the above question.

As for mechanical failures, are they not unusual on mechanical equipment. but if an exhaust drops off your car does it make it a death trap

The BBC really should drum up something better on a slow news day.

[poliss]

A complete engine falling off is not quite the same thing as the exhaust falling off your car. "(Even so, if you were on a motorway for example, it could cause vehicles behind to crash.)
Read the accident report I posted the link to and think of what would have happened if there had been a train on the other line.
"The rear axle of the train derailed towards, and the train partially obstructed, the other line."
It is when warning signs appear that you should take action. Waiting until someone is killed is not the right way to improve safety.

[b308]

But even the RAIB didn't give any other recommendations other than be more vigilant in checking things at maintenance depots. Had it been a major safety issue they'd have been withdrawn and modified, they weren't. I'll be glad to see the back of them simply because they are noisy and uncomfortable, just like the 50s versions of 4 wheel railcars... 4 wheel coaches were phased out following the introduction of bogies for good reason, pity BR couldn't have learned from their history and never introduced the things...

The car things is a bit of a red herring as if the engine mounts failed on a car the chances are it would get stuck under the front of the car rather than fall out either side or out of the back, the clearance under a car is too low to allow en engine to go under the vehicle.

[Bufferstop]

I travelled on a 141 on the Weardale Railway recently and apart from the odd dodgy rail joint at the speed it was being used it was quite acceptable. Previously I'd travelled Horwich Parkway to Man.Vic. (Noisy and yawing), Harrogate to York and return (absolutely awful ride) and Liskeard to Looe (Deafening - what idiot thinks they are suited to tight curves). Apart from where there are tight curves, which will generate high rates of wheel and railhead wear, branch and community lines would seem to be the best home for them. When they were introduced BR expected declining passenger numbers would see them used on main lines with CWR, so designed them around an express goods wagon running gear. Their faults (or should that be inadequacies) can be traced back to the source of so many rail related problems, bad management decision making and too much financial shorttermism. As for basic safety they are no different to any of the light rail/heavy tram ideas being proposed, they are less crashworthy if mixed in with standard construction stock. Put 'em out to grass where people will be glad to have a train at all.
John W
aka Bufferstop.

[montyburns1982]

I have direct knowledge of the transmission systems fitted to these vehicles as I supply them to TOCs.

They are no more dangerous than anything fitted to 15x series units or any other vehicle fitted with Cardan shafts. Most of the issues stem from poor maintenance or mechanical failure; which even the most advanced systems suffer from.

The only concern for the Pacer fleet is crashworthiness, as the body is could be completely severed from the frame in a serious collision.

There are plans to keep them running until 2019 until the Disability act removes them from traffic; whether or not they last that long given their rapidly corroding bodywork is anyones guess.

They are an awful passenger experience I agree though!!

[Bufferstop]

The only concern for the Pacer fleet is crashworthiness, as the body is could be completely severed from the frame in a serious collision.

It did on both units at Winsford. Fortunately they were empty apart from the driver, who was in the cab that took a nose dive onto the sleepers. He survived to take the blame for the SPAD but I never found out what happened to him.