The new “Misery Line”?

Today was no track fault despite which was being said over the media and from TfL

How do the performance figures compare, between 1973 Piccadilly stock, and the larger CO/CP types on the District? Was the '73 stock notably quicker than the previous types on the same route?

Comparing performance is difficult, as the District hardly manages to get to full speed between stops whilst the Picc has a non-stop run, but my recollection is that if you had two trains starting together from Hammersmith, they would be pretty much neck and neck up the bank until the District train started to coast for the Ravenscourt Park stop.

Does 1973 stock have a weak field setting, and would it be used between Hammersmith and Acton?

The 1959 stock was on the way out when I first used the line but I don't recall a big difference in speed - the timetable was, of course, designed around the slowest stock on the line.

Yesterday was indeed a track fault. It was a broken running rail immediately east of South Kensington EB. Once a temporary repair was put in place, we had a 5 Mph speed restriction over it. Not in work today so not aware of what today's issues are.

I avoid the line as much as possible, despite it being my local line and the line providing a direct route to work. Instead, I take the Met line and sacrifice 5-10 minutes extra (though not always depending on waiting times for the uxbridge branch). 

They probably are, to be honest. I'm not sure if the 72's have an excuse but I tend to forgive the 92's as the curves they have to make are unnatural for a train, however, I do remember reading, somewhere, that the 92's were specifically made to cater for tight curves but I guess they are getting tired a lot faster than the 73's. Nevertheless, I do love the 92's.

Before I get a warning, sorry about that, back to the topic: I think TfL are mostly relaxed about the picc because they know Crossrail will take a lot of strain for passengers going to Heathrow. 

Here's a question that might help answer the initial idea: In the same way the 96's were built as a cheap replica of the 95's, were 72's were built for longer use and the 73's built to quickly and cheaply replace the old fleet? If they were then TfL can't have seen this dire need of an upgrade as a surprise.

Wouldnt have thought it's difficult to beat the 92ts in that respect! Theyre probably not doing much better than class 483...



The Picc does seem to have drawn the short straw for the foreseeable future. Further, any unconventional solution seems difficult/expensive enough to render it almost a non starter. Beyond thinning services past Arnos Grove, and Acton - Rayners becoming a shuttle, there seems nothing more that could possibly give. Not to mention the size of its fleet being too limited.

One wonders how much it would cost to immunise Rayners - Acton and improve vertical clearances.

I can't remember, I read it somewhere that the 95's were built to last a long amount of time, upwards of 45 years but the 96's were built quote: "on the cheap to last no longer than 30 years". I know its quite unreliable as I can't remember where I read it but it was one of those transport blog pages or something. It might be incorrect as its a single source but I just remember it, I'll have a look to see if I can find the original article.

Thanks for the answer to my question though, I guess that means my theory is incorrect.

I think you are correct that TfL will go into overdrive to try to push Heathrow passengers on to Crossrail - assuming HAL will allow any publicity at the airport!!! However the take up will very largely depend on the fares that apply. I can't see too many people forking out £10.30 single from Paddington to Heathrow on "TfL Rail / Crossrail / Lizzie Line" (I've quoted the current Hrow Connect fare) given Crossrail, for all its wonders, doesn't touch many of the main hotel districts and has fairly poor connections to some tube lines (no connection to the Picc or Victoria).

It would certainly be pretty useless to me given I'd have a far longer walk to a station and far more involved interchanges if I was dragging luggage. Barring lifting my bag on to the local bus and coping with escalators my journey to Heathrow involves no stairs whatsover and 1 tube interchange on to the Picc. The frequency is also vastly higher than on any of the alternative routes. Obviously I am just a sole example out of millions and I dare say plenty of people will use Crossrail to Heathrow and more so if fares are the same as the tube or only very slightly higher. That's the crucial factor for Londoners rather than tourists who may be more prepared to be "ripped off" for journeys to / from airports.

If the fares are reasonable on Crossrail then the Picc may well get a breather of sorts in terms of Heathrow. However I really do feel that TfL have probably pushed things further than they really should in delaying the active start of upgrade works on the line. There are simply far too many things that can go wrong on that line given the age of the assets and the relentless pressure the route works under.

Another signal failure this morning. . .

Old stock verses not being able to go somewhere due to signal failures - I know which I’d rather have...

Exactly my thoughts too.

Regardless of the age of the rolling stock, if it is repeatedly let down by track or signalling faults, then the trains are not really the cause of the "misery" and people should actually be pressing LUL/the Mayor to find the funds needed to fix or better still replace whatever assets are now letting the side down - regardless of whether or not the bean counters consider them to be fully life expired.

Sadly major expenditure in mostly hidden infrastructure like signalling, power supplies and track/formation does not make great tabloid style headlines unlike orders for extra rolling stock.

Unfortunately malcolmffc, you've managed to give a near perfect illustration of sort of thing alpinejohn was talking about in his comment just previously:



From everything established on the thread, the only probable deficiency the Pic has with its stock is that there isn't more of them. The overwhelming majority of its troubles come from infrastructure troubles.

Broken track connection