|
Post by snoggle on Feb 14, 2018 1:12:07 GMT
A paper is going to the Programmes and Investment Cttee seeking £199m of extra funding for a range of works to LU rolling stock (incl engineering vehicles). content.tfl.gov.uk/pic-20180221-item11-pt1-rolling-stock-renewals.pdfI've not been through it in detail but there is a table of planned initiatives and funding. There is some supplementary commentary about works to the Central, Bakerloo and engineering fleets.
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Feb 15, 2018 23:39:09 GMT
As money is tight only works that are needed to ensure that the trains will last into the late 2020's (or even beyond) and are more reliable should be done.
'Nice to have' but not safety critical / maintenance liability resolution expenses should be postponed until funds become available. If the Whitehall politicians think that this is a wrong attitude then ask them to provide the required funds! Not as a loan, but a grant.
Simon
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2018 14:04:04 GMT
I find it interesting that they're looking to 'increase the duration of door close warning tones'. When achieving 36tph, slightly longer stops don't seem to favourable. A smarter idea would be to really advertise how frequent the trains are so people hopefully change their habits and stop obstructing doors. As we've seen from the recent excess of safety announcements, TFL is clearly very good at conveying messages.
|
|
|
Post by notverydeep on Feb 16, 2018 14:11:54 GMT
There is a requirement to comply with the RVAR standard for these warning tones. Until now there has been a concession for a shorter duration, but that appears to be coming to an end...
|
|
|
Post by fish7373 on Feb 16, 2018 16:14:29 GMT
Do love this 4.8 The Bakerloo line fleet comprises 36 seven car trains of 1972 Tube Stock (72TS). It is the ‘next worst’ performing fleet on the network (after the Central line), and is substantially out-performed by the Piccadilly line 73TS which is of a similar age and design. the 72 t/stock are in Acton works Being Heavy Overhauled now.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 16, 2018 17:30:51 GMT
Do love this 4.8 The Bakerloo line fleet comprises 36 seven car trains of 1972 Tube Stock (72TS). It is the ‘next worst’ performing fleet on the network (after the Central line), and is substantially out-performed by the Piccadilly line 73TS which is of a similar age and design. the 72 t/stock are in Acton works Being Heavy Overhauled now. Must be all the hard work done by the staff at Northfields Joking aside, whilst the 72TS are 73TS are nominally a year apart, the designs are considerably further apart. AIUI the 72TS is really little more than a manually operated 67TS, whereas the 73TS was a new design and utilised new technology (which in some ways makes the result even more surprising)
|
|
|
Post by fish7373 on Feb 16, 2018 21:31:05 GMT
Do love this 4.8 The Bakerloo line fleet comprises 36 seven car trains of 1972 Tube Stock (72TS). It is the ‘next worst’ performing fleet on the network (after the Central line), and is substantially out-performed by the Piccadilly line 73TS which is of a similar age and design. the 72 t/stock are in Acton works Being Heavy Overhauled now. Must be all the hard work done by the staff at Northfields Joking aside, whilst the 72TS are 73TS are nominally a year apart, the designs are considerably further apart. AIUI the 72TS is really little more than a manually operated 67TS, whereas the 73TS was a new design and utilised new technology (which in some ways makes the result even more surprising) There is no new technology in a 73 still old school equipment in them.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Feb 16, 2018 22:03:12 GMT
Must be all the hard work done by the staff at Northfields Joking aside, whilst the 72TS are 73TS are nominally a year apart, the designs are considerably further apart. AIUI the 72TS is really little more than a manually operated 67TS, whereas the 73TS was a new design and utilised new technology (which in some ways makes the result even more surprising) There is no new technology in a 73 still old school equipment in them. New for the time then! Things like the Fault Annunciation, a Round-train-wire, and Solid State Electronics, although I suppose that those would have little to do with vastly improved reliability over the 72TS. Must be the staff working on them then!
|
|
|
Post by fish7373 on Feb 16, 2018 23:09:40 GMT
There is no new technology in a 73 still old school equipment in them. New for the time then! Things like the Fault Annunciation, a Round-train-wire, and Solid State Electronics, although I suppose that those would have little to do with vastly improved reliability over the 72TS. Must be the staff working on them then! The PCM traction is old school Fault Annunciation is a CDU for the drivers to show which car has a fault and you can cut out to get moving and 72 & 67 tube stock have a Round the train wire as well just we look hard at are trains plus 73 are still old technology.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Feb 17, 2018 0:14:14 GMT
‘67 / ‘72 pure Westinghouse brake, Train Line and Main Line pipes; ‘73 Westcode brake, only Main Line air.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 0:34:19 GMT
the 72 t/stock are in Acton works Being Heavy Overhauled now. The funding for the clip has been approved already (Work started on new building for the work to be carried out in), and the battery locos are nearly done with their life extension works.
|
|
|
Post by fish7373 on Feb 17, 2018 0:52:21 GMT
‘67 / ‘72 pure Westinghouse brake, Train Line and Main Line pipes; ‘73 Westcode brake, only Main Line air. That is very right. its not a wire its a audible warning you forgot EP AS WELL.
|
|
|
Post by fish7373 on Feb 17, 2018 1:04:29 GMT
the 72 t/stock are in Acton works Being Heavy Overhauled now. The funding for the clip has been approved already (Work started on new building for the work to be carried out in), and the battery locos are nearly done with their life extension works. 1972 Tube stock in acton works on overhaul in the heavy repaire shop date may 2017 new work shop is for the 1992 t/stock not built yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2018 8:59:24 GMT
The funding for the clip has been approved already (Work started on new building for the work to be carried out in), and the battery locos are nearly done with their life extension works. 1972 Tube stock in acton works on overhaul in the heavy repaire shop date may 2017 new work shop is for the 1992 t/stock not built yet. Meant the ground works. The siding is now completely clear and leveled off, and the site office has just been installed for the building contractor.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Feb 17, 2018 9:03:55 GMT
Anyway, dragging this back on topic, there doesn’t seem to be any work planned on the 73 stock. Although the trains are currently relatively reliable, that may change in the next 5 years or so. I mentioned this in the “New Misery Line” thread, but if the stock reliability nosedives, the Picc with its aging infrastructure could become a serious issue.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 17, 2018 14:11:26 GMT
Anyway, dragging this back on topic, there doesn’t seem to be any work planned on the 73 stock. Although the trains are currently relatively reliable, that may change in the next 5 years or so. I mentioned this in the “New Misery Line” thread, but if the stock reliability nosedives, the Picc with its aging infrastructure could become a serious issue. I suspect that a) there is no money for the 73 stock given it is due for replacement b) fiddling with the 73 stock may actually worsen its reliability. I know there were huge concerns about trying to modify it to work with the SSR resignalling - especially wiring in the trains being disturbed and breaking c) there is an element of "wing and a prayer" that the 73s can keep going on existing maintenance and interventions until they are replaced. Obviously this brings risks of its own but in an era of limited cash and current fleet "modifications" proving more involved, costly and time consuming than expected I can understand a reluctance to initiate a fleet modification programme for the 73s. Just my musings but we have been here with the 73 stock for a *very* long time - probably a decade or so.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 17, 2018 17:12:44 GMT
Snoggle et al, I would not be quite so ungracious to call it a "wing and a prayer", but when an end date (based on placing the contract for the replacement "in the spring") has been set, no sensible organisation will want to spend on assets if it doesn't have to. That said, LU is not clairvoyant, and it doesn't know what might fail between now and the last train being replaced. For example, absence of cracks in mechanical parts should not be taken as evidence of none in the future. LU is quite good at identifying areas at risk of cracking and does inspect them routinely, so will, no doubt, deal with them if they occur.
On the matter of design - the fundamentals of the technology are quite similar between 1972 tube stock and 1973 tube stock. There are lots of detailed design differences and it is these that have kept the mechanical parts going more reliably on 1973ts than on 1972. for example, the redesign of the underframe to use different steel sections and to reflect the increased car length.
|
|
|
Post by croxleyn on Feb 17, 2018 19:16:22 GMT
Does anyone have a ball-park figure for the cost of replacing, for example, the Piccadilly or Bakerloo stock, both I gather needing retirement... The reason for asking is that I get fed up with the Watford Observer repeatedly showing local dignitaries moaning that Mr Kahn won't fork out an extra 40, 50 ... million pounds for the Metropolitan (Vanity?) extension. I feel like writing a letter, but then negative views are not newsworthy, so probably won't be printed.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 17, 2018 20:46:50 GMT
croxleyn...... the cost of trains is almost completely unrelated to the cost of the infrastructure. For The Croxley Link (wandering off topic) an additional 8-car S stock was required. This has been purchased as it could only even make sense to do so whilst they were still being made. It cost approx. £8m to £10m. There is a great deal of material around the web on the cost of Croxley Link
For the deep tube upgrade, I would expect the cost of an individual train to be about £10m, but take that figure with a large pinch of salt. Around 90 are needed for the Piccadilly. The number for the Bakerloo will be upwards of 35, depending on whether it's linked to the Lewisham extension. Then there's the cost of the signalling, power supply upgrades, track works, cooling works, not to mention depot works.
|
|
|
Post by croxleyn on Feb 17, 2018 21:18:20 GMT
Thanks. The point I wish to emphasise to the WO is that for the cost of the MLE (I live on the "doorstep" so am very aware of the project) there are far more important projects, benefitting hundreds of thousands of passengers, as opposed to the hundreds or maybe thousands I'm expecting for the MLE.
|
|
|
Post by greggygreggygreg on Feb 17, 2018 22:43:55 GMT
I find it interesting that they're looking to 'increase the duration of door close warning tones'. That's easy - just start closing the doors earlier!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Feb 18, 2018 22:25:04 GMT
croxleyn...... the cost of trains is almost completely unrelated to the cost of the infrastructure. For The Croxley Link (wandering off topic) an additional 8-car S stock was required. This has been purchased as it could only even make sense to do so whilst they were still being made. It cost approx. £8m to £10m. There is a great deal of material around the web on the cost of Croxley Link For the deep tube upgrade, I would expect the cost of an individual train to be about £10m, but take that figure with a large pinch of salt. Around 90 are needed for the Piccadilly. The number for the Bakerloo will be upwards of 35, depending on whether it's linked to the Lewisham extension. Then there's the cost of the signalling, power supply upgrades, track works, cooling works, not to mention depot works. The never realised 1952 tube stock proposal for the Pic was for 100x7car trains. This would have been needed to satisfy a 40tph core. Of course, this was long before Heathrow, but still in the days of Aldwych (Waterloo in the background). Its an interesting comparison that for a 36tph target, sans Aldwych but plus a handful of Heathrows, something like 10% less will be required. Implies a better availability of each block train compared to unit trains of 66 years ago. Given the extra myriad complicated equipment provided on trains now, they must have quite a bit of faith.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 21, 2018 7:50:46 GMT
Ben In the 1950s, the performance characteristic of the 1952 tube stock design would probably have been similar to that of the 1938 tube stock. It was not until the 1980s that LU developed the principles of buying fewer, higher performance trains which, with the benefits of ATO, deliver shorter round trip times. This approach reduces the number of trains needed for a given frequency.
By the way, my "around 90 trains" remark was meant to be a round number, not a precise estimate!
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 22, 2018 19:24:35 GMT
Ben In the 1950s, the performance characteristic of the 1952 tube stock design would probably have been similar to that of the 1938 tube stock. It was not until the 1980s that LU developed the principles of buying fewer, higher performance trains which, with the benefits of ATO, deliver shorter round trip times. This approach reduces the number of trains needed for a given frequency. By the way, my "around 90 trains" remark was meant to be a round number, not a precise estimate! Interesting to learn that the cancelled 1952 scheme was for 100 trains for the Picc. That number has also been put about for the next renewal, although I expect 100andthirty's estimate of around 90 might be truer once affordability comes into play. The 100 trains in 1952 probably allowed for more of them to be in routine maintenance and overhaul than with modern trains. I wonder how many were to be in the expected timetables. Looking at 1938TS's full performance capability, it had a much higher motoring characteristic than the 1959TS trains actually built for the Picc, so it seems to follow that the 1952 scheme would or should have included a lot of resignalling to make use of all that performance. As it was, the Picc still has basically similar performance to pre WW2 over a lot of it and the higher speed capability on the Heathrow branch signalling never used.
|
|