Modern traction, stuff like Sprinters, Pacers, Voyagers. In future will people want to preserve them

Sorry, still disagree. Chip running too fast? Introduce 'wait' states, null loops, whatever. Biggest problem I face is that without a redesign, older TTL (and especially DTL) is getting very hard to source.

 

I'm sure that there will always be a hard core of enthusiasts who want to preserve the trains that they grew up with, so I fully expect a few Sprinters and Pacers to be preserved. However, it's not clear what role they will fulfil on a preserved railway, other than the occasional hard core traction event. First generation DMUs do at least have the appeal of a built-in observation saloon at each end, and can be successfully marketed as a vintage panoramic experience for off-peak services on scenic lines. Class 150s have no such appeal. They have the least passenger-friendly interior of any DMU that I can think of, and no other redeeming features to make them attractive to non-enthusiasts. Yes, they "tell a story", but not a happy one.

 

And the interiors of 1st generation DMUs are quite attractive with a light and airy feel to them, the second generation ones are plasticky and cheap looking

 

But as an early BR York DMU build surely they have a story to tell - albeit a sad one of BR expertise whose cost parameters were geared to meeting imposed cost requirements that were dismissed in favour of private builders whose cost parameters were geared more to shareholders rather than customers

 

I'd support preserving Sprinters/Pacers etc them as part of the British Railway story, and in the case of the Class 150 as a warning to future generations, but I think it'll be many years before they seem like a fun day out with the kids.

That said, despite many journeys sat on Pacer loathing the rickety old buckets, I feel oddly compelled to make sure I do one final journey on them before they are replaced.

 

Well you could say the 150/156's are more airy inside than a sealed 220 because of the hopper windows and as they are configured internally now they have airline seats but to alter that to groups of 4 would be easy as the seats are easily taken out, now I'm not saying it's something I would love to spend my time in but in years to come people may see them as quaint,compared to what there will be then, and let's not forget many people in pres and more than a few on here see DMU's as awfully modern so they will see a 150 as the anti-christ but they are a lot easier to maintain than older stock so that should count for something, also lets not forget are we a preserved RAILWAY or some sort of glorified theme park, the story of the train did not end in 1968 despite what some might say

 

I agree with you on the role of history, but you may want to think about what those changes would do to the historical integrity of a Voyager.

 

Well I was talking about 150's to be fair not 220's, and the internal seat layouts have been changed loads of times since they were new the ATW have bays of 4 with tables now so it would not be a massive leap

 

My mistake - I misread you. I gather though that the rust on 150s would give many Mk1s a run for their money.

 

Look North TV gave us a look at the new Northern sets that are coming off the production line in Spain. They'll do nicely thanks, bring em on. Due to be up and running this year.

Burn the Pacers.

 

Having a story to tell ... fine, but that makes these units primarily suitable as an exhibit at the NRM; or any other large museums that try to give a comprehensive history of British railways.

In the heritage railway sector we can't get away from the need to appeal, strongly, to the general public and give them a pleasant nostalgic experience during their train ride. That has to be paramount. Having done all we can to guarantee that, will there be enough resource (time, money, and siding or undercover space) left over to preserve unattractive units that will be static exhibits most of the time?

 

Someone on Usenet advocated in their .sig using them to form a reef in the sea....

 

The problem is that there is a finite amount of 'nice stock' available. The bottom line is that if say the new Somerset and Dorset at Midsomer Norton needs rolling stock and all they can afford is a secondhand Pacer then it makes sense to do so. Why on earth would a line like that with limited resources pick up a fifth hand 1st gen dmu that may need a lot of work when there is a relatively fresh unit with plenty of spares available? Especially if the priority of the railway is extending or restoring a 'flagship' project?

I think the 'would never run a pacer' crowd ignore the history of the heritage railway movement which has always depended on taking second hand stock straight from BR. I can well remember travelling on the MHR in the 80s and 90s in second hand mk2s. I have a memory of travelling on one preserved railway in a carriage still in NSE livery. Were they lovely? Not really but they got the job done. Railway managements have always taken what they can, when they could. (and this is why we have some gaps).

I doubt that there is a railway anywhere that wouldn't welcome period rolling stock, locos, all beautifully restored to a high level, but that doesn't exist, so you have to make do with what you've got and what you can get.

And from the history of the Bluebell we have this:

http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/bash/hist.html

Not because they gave the best views, not because they were historically important, not because they gave nostalgic ride but because they were cheap and they were available.

If a Pacer is preserved it will probably be for the same reasons.

 

My view on Pacers is that there are dedicated bouncy castle companies out there already. 121s are bumpy enough.

 

All the "too complicated" and "couldn't be restored" comments bring a wry smile to my face. In the grand scheme of things, it wasn't all that long ago that 71000 (with no cylinders) was a 'Mission Impossible" and 6023 (suffering from gas axed drivers) bearing a chalked message asserting it couldn't be saved both languished at Woodham's. As for the notion of building an entire brand new mainline express loco ...... that was "bring on the men in white coats" territory.

Just 'cos something is outside the scope of our generation(s) of restorers doesn't mean for a moment that will remain the case as new blood enters the ranks and relevant knowledge plus maintenance equipment (which the pioneers could scarcely have dreamt of) becomes obsolete on the big railway.

Come on folks.... this is the heritage movement. Miracles performed to order, although the impossible may still take a little longer ( and yes .... a lot more money!). Look at how far things have come since "Dolgoch" wheezed out of Wharf with that first 'preservation era' train back on that day in May 1951, when the workshop at Pendre didn't even have electic lighting!

So, just because we don't currently have the knowledge of setup means a new generation won't adapt and learn? Are today's generation less resourceful, or denser than their forebears? That'd be a rather condescending attitude to take, wouldn't you say?

Now put your hand on your heart and tell me that modern kit won't ever be preserved in working order ... go on - I dare you!

 

I suggest that the difference between your average Voyager and 71000/6023/"Dolgoch" is desirability. That is not because they are diesels - I suggest 50026 demonstrates what can be done with impossible projects - but because they lack following that would see them build up support, and if supported, would sit ill with any current preserved line. Given that, I doubt that a unit from class 220/221/222 will be preserved in working order and, if it is, very much doubt that it will stay in working order for long.

 

Quite! As I've said, for me, Voyagers mean happy times going home from uni and pacers walks in the peaks, so I ought to be interested in preserving them, but I emphatically am not! If they were a bit more comfortable then maybe I could see my way to being persuaded to even though I'm much more interested in steam, but they're not!

 

They lack a following 'at the moment' I think that with any unit, absence makes the heart grow fonder. I can well recall comments about 'who'd preserve a 73, 56 etc'. Railway preservationists tend to have 'quirky' desires and obsessions, so I'd never say that there won't be a hardcore of people who desire Pacers, Sprinters, Voyagers etc.

 

Desireable (or not) to thee and me perhaps, but it's all subjective. Dunno about you, but I'm sure as hell not about to tell anyone what they will or won't like right now, never mind how future generations might perceive things. Consider, we've Swindonites a-plenty among our number who'll barely credit Stanier's output as half way decent ..... never mind the Riddles' standards.

I'll grant you we're a way off knowing how things will pan out for the restored 5BEL, but if the Trust make a good fist of it, the project could be as much of a game changer as "The Jacobite" turned out to be.

Would a Pendelino ever suit, say, the Bluebell? In my books, Bob forbid (!), but our movement has proved pretty adaptable over the years and I somehow don't see that changing any time soon. I've every confidence they'll find appropriate solutions to the situation they face when the time comes.