Pacer Replacement

Discussion relating to the operations of real railways together with the experiences of the people who work (or have worked) on them.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Thrashin
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 5:18 pm
Location: Hither and Yon - (Cumbria)

Post by Thrashin »

enotayokel wrote:Rumour now that FGW are taking on 142s!
How long before one of them works a Penzance - Paddington then... :)
User avatar
daandmda
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 871
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Manchester Victoria Station in 1910

Post by daandmda »

MoonKid47 wrote:
enotayokel wrote:Rumour now that FGW are taking on 142s!
They need them for extra capacity, and good since Northern are getting rid of them for 158s.

Why didnt FGW order those 158s instead though......
'cos we got there first 8)
User avatar
enotayokel
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 2584
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 7:04 pm

Post by enotayokel »

I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't do to with a Leasco trying to shift the 142s so reducing the lease costs massively.

AIUI Porterbrook have been doing good deals on the ex-TPX 158s - hence SWT and FGW have swapped/are swapping Angel 158s for Porterbrook.

Angel have now cottoned on and are discounting their stored 158s which Northern are taking on.

A similar situation is renewing our house insurance. To renew cost £300. As a 'new' customer - the exact same cover from the exact same company was £150

This is why there is currently a massive game of Pass-the-Sprinter going on
User avatar
arabiandisco
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 3496
Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 9:49 am
Location: The Church of Noise
Contact:

Post by arabiandisco »

Thrashin wrote:
enotayokel wrote:Rumour now that FGW are taking on 142s!
How long before one of them works a Penzance - Paddington then... :)
They sent a 153 once, so anything's possible...

Which end is the restaurant car?
Having a brain bypass
Go 49ers
User avatar
daandmda
Well Established Forum Member
Posts: 871
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Manchester Victoria Station in 1910

Post by daandmda »

arabiandisco wrote:
Thrashin wrote:
enotayokel wrote:Rumour now that FGW are taking on 142s!
How long before one of them works a Penzance - Paddington then... :)
They sent a 153 once, so anything's possible...

Which end is the restaurant car?
This is a Pacer, not a Pendo :lol:
User avatar
salopiangrowler
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 7796
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Shrewsbury
Contact:

Post by salopiangrowler »

They've had Pacers on the Old Shrewsbury - Wakefiled West Gate's before now.

good old Jolly that is:

Shrewsbury > Wrexham > Chester > Frodsham > Warrington > Earlestown > Manchester Victoria > Wakefield.

All stations
Image
jackandyclare1
Getting the hang of things now
Posts: 22
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 10:55 am

Re: Pacer Replacement

Post by jackandyclare1 »

Pacers are fantastic little trains. They're not like all them German pieces of rubbish you get. They're British made using British materials in Britain. I think the 143's and 144's accelerate faster than the the 142's, I don't know why, maybe because they have a lighter chassis or are mid-engined or something but you'll have to see Jeremy Clarkson on that one. Also, sprinters and other trains, when you hear them go past and infact when you're on them, the clickety-clack sound of the wheels is boring and pathetic. Pacers have a better clickety-clack noise and they are really bouncy because of the 4 wheel per car set up. And the engines sound fantastic aswell at full throttle. And they've got huge windows, tonnes bigger than 156's, etc. etc
User avatar
salopiangrowler
Very Active Forum Member
Posts: 7796
Joined: Mon Aug 12, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Shrewsbury
Contact:

Re: Pacer Replacement

Post by salopiangrowler »

well not actually the 142's are the worst trains ive been on and ive done the oldham loop on one and approached liverpool lime street on one and to be honest i prefer the 141's to all pacers
Image
Locked

Return to “Real Railway Discussion”