|
Post by underground2010 on Mar 6, 2011 17:32:01 GMT
I'm curious as to why the 1983 stock didn't run that long on the Underground network. "Unlike the D Stock, the 1983 Tube Stock proved to be unreliable. Electrical generators for lighting the carriages failed often, as did the motors. Boarding of passengers slowed down because of the single doors." - Wikipedia. I don't know whether that was the reason for the withdrawal of the trains or whether there was any other reason why they may have been taken out of service? I remember seeing one stabled in Upminster Depot when I went there years ago...but they were still in service then.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2011 17:35:49 GMT
The Jubilee Line Extension was the reason for their withdrawal. With PEDs and needing more rolling stock they would have had to redo the doors (and thence bodyshells) on the 83ts. With reliability being a factor they just ordered a full batch of 96ts.
At least that's what I read. Trying to remember where...
|
|
|
Post by underground2010 on Mar 6, 2011 17:40:03 GMT
The Jubilee Line Extension was the reason for their withdrawal. With PEDs and needing more rolling stock they would have had to redo the doors (and thence bodyshells) on the 83ts. With reliability being a factor they just ordered a full batch of 96ts. At least that's what I read. Trying to remember where... That makes more sense to me than the information given on Wikipedia. Surely if there wasn't an extension being done and there wasn't any need for new stock, they would work on improving the faults.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2011 17:41:56 GMT
Well, the original plan to extend the Jubilee Line was rather different to the route it is now. Aldwych, Cannon Street, Ludgate Circus...
|
|
|
Post by underground2010 on Mar 6, 2011 17:45:48 GMT
Would the termination still be at Stratford? I do remember when I was about 7 and my grandad did work for the Underground, we got the chance to 'preview' some of the line while it was still under construction. We got the chance to board a test train in part of the Underground section which was quite ace!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2011 17:55:55 GMT
Don't think so. It was a completely different route planned to serve the Docklands developments.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Mar 6, 2011 21:53:20 GMT
Well, the original plan to extend the Jubilee Line was rather different to the route it is now. Aldwych, Cannon Street, Ludgate Circus... ......Fenchurch Street, Surrey Docks, New Cross, Lewisham, as I recall. later changed (as the "River Line") after Surrey Docks to go something like Isle of Dogs, Greenwhich Peninsula, Royal Docks, Thamesmead The 1983 stock has left a legacy though, because at one time the plan was, as I understand it, that the trains would be re-formed with both old 1983 and new 1996 stock in the same train, and the body profiles of the new stock, particularly the windows, were designed to match. Consequently the little tiny windows of the 1996 stock, (and the 1995 stock!) are to match the 1983 stock!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Mar 7, 2011 7:43:58 GMT
Yes, each three car set would have been lengthened by adding 3 new cars and upgrading the existing. Just as well I would have thought as it may have looked like a modern Q stock!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2011 9:42:16 GMT
And what's wrong with that? ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2011 9:44:41 GMT
You can see some 1983 stock cars from the East London Line on the curve between Shoreditch and Hoxton.
|
|
|
Post by underground2010 on Mar 7, 2011 14:57:30 GMT
You can see some 1983 stock cars from the East London Line on the curve between Shoreditch and Hoxton. I thought most of the trains were scrapped in Rotherham. Another can be seen at in the sidings at South Harrow tube station on the eastbound side. One carriage is on display at the London Transport Museum at Action Depot. Another one is used for Lollipop Radio at Great Ormond Street Hospital.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 7, 2011 15:40:38 GMT
I did write a short history of the Fleet Line and its morph into the JLE on wiki, regrettably the artical was deleted as someone deemed it too similar to what i wrote on the Jubilee Lines main page. Such is life! However I wouldn't dismiss what the artical says about 83ts strsight out of hand. Single leaf doors are pathetic for metro services, and the old chestnut of unreliability has raised its head on here more than a few times aswell.
Conversely using PEDS as the reason for their withdrawl is false. They would have been rebuilt anyway to remove the wide single leafs for capacity reasons; PEDs would have just been designed and installed to match with whatever ran. The apertures are in the same place at roughly ¼ and ¾ positions, they just arent as wide.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Mar 7, 2011 15:52:39 GMT
You can see some 1983 stock cars from the East London Line on the curve between Shoreditch and Hoxton. I thought most of the trains were scrapped in Rotherham. Another can be seen at in the sidings at South Harrow tube station on the eastbound side. One carriage is on display at the London Transport Museum at Action Depot. Another one is used for Lollipop Radio at Great Ormond Street Hospital. A car was sold to the Tyne & Wear Fire Service, and can be seen on Google Earth. Another car was sold to the Design Research Establishment of Garston, Watford - anyone know whether it still exists ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2011 17:13:05 GMT
A car was sold to the Tyne & Wear Fire Service, and can be seen on Google Earth. Another car was sold to the Design Research Establishment of Garston, Watford - anyone know whether it still exists ? Yeah as an example of "how not to design a train" I would imagine ;D Would be nice if those cars in fairly decent condition got paired up with the one at acton. I think another downfall of the 1983 stock was its equipment, the bogies were a problematic design and also so Iv'e read, the motor alternators were rubbish (thingys that control lighting and stuff) which sometimes meant the lights would go!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Mar 7, 2011 18:44:34 GMT
I thought it was well known that their equipment was unreliable. The batch one cars were especially bad although the batch two where much better, and 5 years younger!
The killer blow was that new trains weren't going to cost as much as the conversion and addition of extra cars. In the end, common sence prevailed. It is still a shame the batch II cars could be used on the piccadilly, although having a mixed fleet is very popular.
I wonder if the trains could have been kept with just single doors?
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Mar 7, 2011 18:48:46 GMT
The reason that they were not used on the Piccadilly was the single leaf doors. It was realised that if they were used on the Heathrow services there would be problems for people with large and/or heavy luggage.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Mar 7, 2011 19:00:35 GMT
Oh forgot about Heathrow! That wouldn't have worked well. They could have been used for the Uxbridge service only, but they would no doubt have mingled with other destinations. The doors really were a disaster!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 7, 2011 19:52:35 GMT
The batch one stock, incidentally, was slightly too big for some of the tunnels and so had to be altered. Allegedly. Would have made excellent 'shuttle' stock, if the tube still had some!
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Mar 7, 2011 20:02:46 GMT
Would have made excellent 'shuttle' stock, if the tube still had some! Those single doors would have been a nuisance on the "Drain", but the Mill Hill branch could have used one I suppose. (Or Chesham?)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2011 20:03:24 GMT
Would have made excellent 'shuttle' stock, if the tube still had some! Those single doors would have been a nuisance on the "Drain", but the Mill Hill branch could have used one I suppose. (Or Chesham?) Even the wide 92ts doors aren't wide enough in the peak on the Drain, because of the very nature of the line!
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Mar 7, 2011 21:07:36 GMT
I did write a short history of the Fleet Line and its morph into the JLE on wiki, regrettably the artical was deleted as someone deemed it too similar to what i wrote on the Jubilee Lines main page. Such is life! Sadly, it's all too common on Wiki, I've re-written countless times the history of Arsenal for instance, and it gets deleted and replaced with facts from a forum needing publicity, sadly with more inaccuracies than you can shake a stick at. I rewrote our local radio station page with everything absolutely bang up to date, but that got deleted and replaced with garbage and eventually something that doesn't even resemble a true account of it. Of the former, there isn't a lot I can be told about, and the latter, I work freelance for them, so I really do know my stuff.
|
|
|
Post by phillw48 on Mar 7, 2011 21:21:33 GMT
I suppose if the Epping-Ongar line had remained open they could have been used on there. With a north easter straight of the Urals those single leaf doors would be an asset!
|
|
|
Post by singaporesam on Mar 9, 2011 13:20:30 GMT
The reason that they were not used on the Piccadilly was the single leaf doors. It was realised that if they were used on the Heathrow services there would be problems for people with large and/or heavy luggage. I seem to recall quite a lot of activity on the issue of running some 83s dedicated to the Rayners Branch, now as I remember it the killer issue was dQ/Q, and the impact on Track maintenance in certain locations if 83s were run on the Picc, my memory could be failing but I definitely remember something on those lines
|
|
|
Post by auxsetreq on Mar 9, 2011 17:12:04 GMT
If you want to know about the unpopular, hastily designed, badly built with a colour scheme and interior that could of been described as hideous - Yes the 1983 stock, then you must get a fantastic book by Paul Moss called Underground Movement. It's a shame 'badly built' didn't stop there. The history of Underground train design past, present and future. Photos Galore. Highly recommended.......... www.amazon.co.uk/Underground-Movement-Paul-Moss/dp/1854142267According to the book. At the end of the 90's at least fifteen trains were to be converted to double doors and refurbed to the same standard as the refurbed 73s on the Picc. The most expensive refurbishment ever, but the decision was then made to retain the single doors. Which was then changed to scrap em and sell two cars to plop on a roof to be used as offices............Personally I didn't find them that bad. D78's for tube tunnels really. I remember them being tested at Northfields and distinctly recall how new they looked, particularly the wooden floor, and the red nut on a silver stick the driver had to hold and twist to make it go. Same TBC as the District Line trains. Quite a change from the one arm bandits I was driving at the time on the Picc............
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Mar 9, 2011 19:14:38 GMT
I liked the 1983 stock but the doors were a problem. At least the D stock had 4 doors all off equal size.
I would have cost a fair bit to rebuild the 83s to have double doorways. I wonder what it would have looked like? There were 3 windows in the centre section of the 83s. Would one windows have been removed to get the extra doors in or would the two side windows been reduced in size?
|
|
|
Post by auxsetreq on Mar 9, 2011 19:37:57 GMT
I think it's in the same book that the colour scheme proposed for the interior was an aubergine and a lighter shade of the same colour. It has to be said the the original mustard and yellow was pukeadelic.................Anyway see them and the 62s in all their glory here in this fantastic music vid. I really love this for many reasons. The graffiti vandalism craze had yet to start so the trains looked pristine. And he looks so fresh and happy. Linda was alive, he was as creative as ever, and everyone looks so pleased to see him and it's real feel good song...........The album this is from was slagged off by the critics, but I think it's one of his best...................Oh and check out that bird's toilet seat earrings.......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2011 20:43:06 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2011 21:35:10 GMT
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Mar 9, 2011 21:46:33 GMT
The 83ts has got to be one of the best examples of money being wasted though on the tube surely? Built under the assumption that traffic wouldn't return to the tube ever, problems with gauge, problems with equipment, and then a second batch built a decade before the whole lot went.
I'm curious as to whether having every unit double ended was purely down to flexibility, or whether it was back-door future proofing for single unit use, assuming a second compressor fitted.
As for shuttles, Ongar, Roding Valley, Alwych, MHE all spring to mind; the former 2 having the benefit of relieving the centrals 92ts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2011 22:55:11 GMT
I'm very confident that single-unit use in service was not a big consideration, though it could have been made feasible.
A more likely future option in the stock planners' minds might have been to expand the fleet in the future by adding additional vehicles inside each unit to create a six-car train - without middle cabs.
I was involved in running a single-unit 1983 Stock for quite a time, though. This was as a test train, with the necessary second compressor temporarily installed in one door bay on the trailer, connected and plumbed, and ready to be switched in if the permanent machine failed.
Certainly there were a number of unsatisfactory aspects of the stock, as all have mentioned. Some good points come to mind, though, having spent quite a lot of my early career in, under, at the front or generally connected with the 1983 Stock - the robustness of the electronics and quality of the electrical installation was way better than any of the preceding stocks, and the circuit design was good, given the growing complexity required of underground trains by that time.
|
|