Talk:Pacer (British Rail)

Trains: in UK / Passenger trains Low‑importance

	Trains Portal
Sel	week 51, 2020

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Passenger trains task force.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Pacer's poor performance[edit]

Who says the Pacers have poor performance ? They may have many disadvantages but they`ve actually got a pretty high power to weight ratio.--JustinSmith (talk) 09:05, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The Pacer series was the result of an experiment to see whether the possibility of using bus parts to create a diesel multiple unit was viable - the results of this are still undecided"

What? Twenty-five years on there shouldn't be any doubt: it worked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.228.162.7 (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Trains[edit]

Last Northern Trains pacer has been retired see tweet from Northern below.

https://twitter.com/northernassist/status/1332380266850115587?s=21 Maurice Oly (talk) 20:24, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tweets are not reliable sources. Anybody can tweet anything, it carries no weight of reliability whatsoever. I might tweet "I just won the U.S. Presidential Election because everybody else cheated". Doesn't make it true. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't, but I don't think you're a train operating company, are you? Although not ideal, a tweet from the official account of the respective operating company ought to do for now, surely? Neith-Nabu (talk) 22:07, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

First, WP:SPS. Second, WP:PRIMARY. Third, WP:DEADLINE. Where is the harm in waiting for something to be published in the generally reliable railway press, such as Modern Railways, Rail, The Railway Magazine, or Today's Railways UK? The purpose of Wikipedia is not to be the first website to report an event, but to report on whet others have already described. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:58, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

However, as Wikipedia policy allows for the use of official Twitter feeds as a source, there is also no harm in adding the information provided by them. In fact, it would contribute towards making Wikipedia more accurate - which is why the policy allows for the use of such sources. Neith-Nabu (talk) 17:57, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh retirement[edit]

The permission for pacers to run expires on the 31st of this month:

https://www.railmagazine.com/news/network/pacers-continue-in-traffic-in-2021

Its possible that they retired them on the 16th but I can't find any evidence that they have done so.©Geni (talk) 11:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Railways which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Replacements[edit]

The Replacements section is misleading and outdated, mentioning the CAF Civity - replaced other stock, D-Train - Vivarail went bust, and Class 144e - one built. It needs to lead with the replacement policy primarily being the cascading of other stock, usually of the same generation and age as the Pacers, such as Class 150s - the picture caption is currently a more accurate description of the replacement process than the actual Replacements section - and Class 156s, whereas to a reader without background knowledge the section currently implies Pacers were replaced by new or at least completely rebuilt stock. 82.41.63.74 (talk) 18:45, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]