Oswestry Update

You can't preserve everything though ...

I think on museum / curatorial grounds, there is an argument that says a Pacer should be preserved as an example of a particular strand of rolling stock development - you can see them as the spiritual successors of the early 20th century railmotors, designed to try to improve the economic viability of lightly-used lines.

But once you have one - all the others have to wash their own face in operational terms. To try to pretend that all that have gone to a heritage railway are by some virtue "safe" is to ignore the opportunity cost that comes with preserving them. (What isn't being looked after if the resources are going into a pacer?)

So if lots that got transferred to heritage lines get scrapped I wouldn't mourn, provided those that remain do so because they fulfil a genuine operational need.

Tom

 

LSL's set can still be seen on the main line. It is based at Crewe.

 

... To remind future generations "never again"!

Sent from my PGT-N19 using Tapatalk

 

I'm certainly no expert on Pacers, but I think the 142004 is amongst the first batch built (1985) and with the 3 x 2 bench seating and different control layout, it does look quite different internally than the others that we have (even though there is only a year or two between them). It is also built by BREL, whereas 143619 was built by Barclay in 1986 and features different controls and seat layout. So both worthy of preservation ( Did I really just say that? Don't tell anyone!)

 

Has there been any acquisition of critical spare parts for any of the Pacers and others?
Anything from Drivers seats to wheelsets.

 

Above my pay grade, but I know there have been some new relays purchased for the 143619 (which successfully operated it's first service yesterday - a school charter). Having 4 sets but only really needing 1 operating does mean there are potential sources of spares on site. . .

 

Two things. First is about what constitutes “preservation” and how that affects the approach taken to “preserved” stock. The second, which you don’t touch on, is the “use and dispose” approach implied in these posts.

Beyond a general view that Pacers are like 100-seaters (more important than loved) I’ve no particular desire for lots to survive or obsession about individual representatives. But I do have concerns about what this usage pattern says about the railways on which they’re based.

 

I must confess i just can't see how preservation and Pacer units have anything in common. Jamesquared makes a fair point about perhaps keeping one in the national collection for the sake of completeness, but how Oswestry or any other preserved line can possibly justify purchasing one is beyond me. I know some examples are donated at nil cost but what about the cost of maintaining them to no useful purpose or visitor interest.

If any preserved line ever does commit to a commuter style service during the week Pacers would be a deterrant rather than an encouragement to travel.

Oswestry isn't going any distance in terms of running line and the public want steam, not a rotting greenhouse built on a primitive chassis. Weigh all 4 of them in for scrap and preserve something worthwhile.

 

Basically, it costs a lot less to operate a DMU (aka Pacer) than it does steam, so for mid-week opening a Pacer makes a little money, whereas a loco hauled (diesel or steam) would lose money. It also only requires 2 train crew.

PS. I won't argue with the greenhouse description.

 

My railway got offered a Pacer several times. We looked at it but decided that there were a number of reasons why we had to decline. Spare parts. The issue of rescuing a failed unit, the sensors on the wheels,, compatibility with other stock, and that’s aside from the general appeal to the public v steam. I tend to agree that like with all “new” things the novelty might have worn off quickly.

 

Of course you're right about operating cost, but it's no good saving on fuel if no one will pay to travel on them.

 

My point was that people do pay to travel on them. We often make more money on Wednesdays than we do Saturdays - with much less effort (Although not nearly as much fun for those of us who just want to play trains )

Most failures seem to be faulty relays, but there are industry standard equivalents than can be used in place of the BR ones.
There are adapters than allow a normal screw coupling loco to 'hook up' to a Pacer.

 

'Twas ever thus. Look how older, more established, heritage railways essentially burnt through cheap Mark 1s. A lot are likely to be scrapped in the next ten years. Hopefully the ones that survive will be the ones that are historically most significant, but I wouldn't necessarily put money on it. There are probably a lot of early diesels which have been "preserved" but aren't safe, and will probably end up being broken up for component recovery. The capacity of the industry to restore and maintain stock is not infinite.

Tom

 

And I’m no more comfortable about that with the Mk1

 

it’s true there are work arounds, though I-think the right decision was made for my railway. I don’t begrudge others using them though, each to their own.