|
|
Post by rtt1928 on Jan 7, 2017 12:35:44 GMT
I wasn't sure where to put this and didn't want to cause thread drift elsewhere.
Does anyone know whether there is any way these trains can be used anywhere else once they are withdrawn from the Central line (and the W&C), I am of course mindful of the fact that the fleet has been far from problem-free since their introduction to service and also that withdrawal is still someway in the future.
Or would they go straight for scrap?
I ask given how expensive the process of replacing rolling stock is and wonder if LU can somehow recoup all (or as much as possible) of the expense of keeping the 92ts in serviceable condition.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 7, 2017 14:00:16 GMT
I suppose the question is - where could they go?
They are only compatible with one specific type of signalling, so a lot of modifications would be needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by rtt1928 on Jan 7, 2017 14:18:44 GMT
I suppose the question is - where could they go? They are only compatible with one specific type of signalling, so a lot of modifications would be needed. I realise that the thought of more expensive modifications to enable compatibility with another signalling system would limit the chances of any other rail operators being willing to take on the cascaded fleet |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2017 18:44:55 GMT
It all depends what they are like after all the work due to be carried out on them. I can imagine them making a new set of central RATs out of them if they prove to be ok.
|
|
|
|
Post by bassmike on Jan 7, 2017 20:20:02 GMT
Send them to the I O W.
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jan 7, 2017 20:47:44 GMT
Think they might not need scrapping - they could just fall apart.
Awful trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jan 7, 2017 21:09:22 GMT
What has the I.O.W. done to deserve that?!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2017 21:09:44 GMT
Indeed, just remove the duct tape and they'll fall in apart in your hands.
|
|
|
|
Post by frankpick on Jan 7, 2017 22:15:20 GMT
Isn't this stock the first that was NOT designed by London Underground?
|
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 7, 2017 22:28:18 GMT
Perhaps a car that has the most duct tape could be preserved at Acton to show just how bad these trains were, as part of a display that also makes it possible for visitors to see the motor hanging down (to demonstrate what caused their emergency withdrawal for many months in 2003)... otherwise they should be scrapped. It would be unfair to the recipients to sell them to anyone.
I would not even use them as emergency temporary housing for the homeless, holiday homes, school classrooms, etc., such as has sometimes happened to trains that are no longer needed by the railway.
Simon
|
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jan 7, 2017 22:39:59 GMT
I don't think there is any chance of them being used elsewhere, however I cannot see where there would be any more expense in fitting them up for conventional signalling than with any other lul stock.
Driver sees red light and stops, TWPS or whatever needs to be installed.
|
|
londoner
thinking on '73 stock
Posts: 478 
|
Post by londoner on Jan 7, 2017 23:43:19 GMT
What proportion of the material on the cars can be recycled?
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jan 8, 2017 2:53:12 GMT
Isn't this stock the first that was NOT designed by London Underground? Yes and it shows but some of the brief to the designers didn't help. The main problem is the size and curve of the windows which causes the body to flex. This caused the end car windows to almost pop out and the need for duct tape. The original bogies were bought from Japan and the frames cracked soon after entering service and had to be welded together. |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jan 8, 2017 9:11:35 GMT
TBH, am surprised they have lasted this long. As an indication of build quality, the armrests were of the substance of wire coathangers. They fell off after about a week and have never been replaced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2017 10:21:54 GMT
Even the 1983 stock was better in many respects, they should have really ordered an eight car version of the 1983 stock in 1989 in order to replace the Central Line's 1962 stock cars.
|
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jan 8, 2017 10:46:39 GMT
As I remember it, there was a build of 3-4 prototypes. They were exhibited at Woodford bay platform in June 1987 (must have been then as I remember James Arbuthnot's loudspeaker van outside the station thanking people for electing him).
AIRI, the prototypes were much better than what emerged as the 92s...
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 8, 2017 13:49:00 GMT
Even the 1983 stock was better in many respects, they should have really ordered an eight car version of the 1983 stock in 1989 in order to replace the Central Line's 1962 stock cars. Without the single leaf doors! |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jan 8, 2017 13:55:31 GMT
As I remember it, there was a build of 3-4 prototypes. They were exhibited at Woodford bay platform in June 1987 (must have been then as I remember James Arbuthnot's loudspeaker van outside the station thanking people for electing him). AIRI, the prototypes were much better than what emerged as the 92s... There were three four-car trains (red, green and blue), formed like the 1992 stock in 2-car units so that they could be mixed and matched to form two six-car trains for evaluation, and they ran on the Jubilee Line for a while in that form. link |
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jan 8, 2017 13:58:37 GMT
Even the 1983 stock was better in many respects, they should have really ordered an eight car version of the 1983 stock in 1989 in order to replace the Central Line's 1962 stock cars. The single doors of the 83 stock were a disaster so don't think so. |
|
hobbayne
RIP John Lennon and George Harrison
Posts: 516
|
Post by hobbayne on Jan 8, 2017 15:36:54 GMT
The 92's were fitted with tripcocks when they first appeared circa April 1993 when they ran alongside the 62's. They were also manually driven in coded manual.
Technically it wasnt really coded manual since there was no codes at that time.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 8, 2017 18:04:43 GMT
Isn't this stock the first that was NOT designed by London Underground? Yes and it shows but some of the brief to the designers didn't help. The main problem is the size and curve of the windows which causes the body to flex. This caused the end car windows to almost pop out and the need for duct tape. Are you sure about body flex? I recall that when new they were so stiff that the synchronised jacks kept stopping as one jack would detect itself unloading as all the weight was on the other three, whereas a floppy old 62TS car tested OK on the same jacks. I agree the 92TS body stiffness does rely in part on the windows and that reduces once corrosion got behind the window bonding. Of course they've all been taken out and refitted with a subframe now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 16:26:56 GMT
A few cars of 92 stock have appeared in the workshop at acton works.
|
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jan 9, 2017 17:47:04 GMT
A few cars of 92 stock have appeared in the workshop at acton works .B&Q FIFU  |
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jan 9, 2017 19:37:14 GMT
A few cars of 92 stock have appeared in the workshop at acton works. part of the heavy overhaul programme? Reason for the reduced service on the Central Line at the moment, |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 21:38:50 GMT
A few cars of 92 stock have appeared in the workshop at acton works .B&Q FIFU No, defo Acton works.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2017 21:40:19 GMT
A few cars of 92 stock have appeared in the workshop at acton works. part of the heavy overhaul programme? Reason for the reduced service on the Central Line at the moment, 2018 work is planned to begin. These cars are purely so a scheme of work can be prepared, and a work process developed. |
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Jan 12, 2017 10:42:20 GMT
As I remember it, there was a build of 3-4 prototypes. They were exhibited at Woodford bay platform in June 1987 (must have been then as I remember James Arbuthnot's loudspeaker van outside the station thanking people for electing him). AIRI, the prototypes were much better than what emerged as the 92s... Was that on the posh side or the not-so-posh side of the line? |
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Jan 12, 2017 11:58:47 GMT
The bay is on "The other side of the lines" as in Horace Newte's novel! But the van was on the posh side.
|
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Jan 12, 2017 22:49:28 GMT
Sorry, I meant old Arbuthnot, I know where the bay is, what was my side of the line, or the not-so-posh side of snakes lane 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Jan 12, 2017 22:50:40 GMT
....or the Monkhams side or the Broadmead/Ray lodge side lol
|
|
