a60
I will make the 8100 Class DART my new A Stock.
Posts: 743
|
Post by a60 on May 4, 2008 20:45:08 GMT
I bet the S Stock will be so unreliable, the A Stock will still be in abundance in 2015. Bloody AC Motors, maybe why 95ts is the least reliable fleet of trains on the Tube. Otherwise we will be fed up with the trains, they'll have to go. I don't want to think their journeys to the depot they'll share with (e.g) Q23 & '67 Stocks. I WONT STAND FOR IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who else agrees with me?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 4, 2008 21:06:06 GMT
I'm not really sure what you're trying to say! I'd love the A stock to be around in 2015 however!!
|
|
a60
I will make the 8100 Class DART my new A Stock.
Posts: 743
|
Post by a60 on May 4, 2008 21:09:06 GMT
What I'm saying is; The S Stock will be so awful, the management will have to send them back to bombardier.
The S Stock seems like a euphamism for something terrible.
|
|
|
Post by edwin on May 4, 2008 21:34:30 GMT
Edwin, yes indeed it is maintenance but also the design - I dislike the style of the seats. I do know many who actually love the 1992 stock interiors like yourself, but for me, they are just becoming a little bit dated. I too hate the lights! Its just my opinion - 1973 stock interiors rule for me. I'm talking about in terms of looks, the 73TS have comfier seats but the 92TS interior looks much better. That bizarre windows moquette (with red arm rests) and the mixture of blue and yellow poles IMO looks hideous!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 4, 2008 21:40:45 GMT
The 73 refurb was actually intended for the Jubilee's 83 stock!
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on May 5, 2008 9:37:08 GMT
The 73 refurb was actually intended for the Jubilee's 83 stock! No, it was a completely separate project. The original idea for the 83TS was to expand the fleet for the JLE by adding cars to the existing 3-car units to make 6-car trains and thus double the size of the fleet. However, the traction kit was dreadful (Kiepe), the MAs were unreliable, the bogies were the same as the old D Stock type and just as bad and the doors were the single leaf type and too narrow for the expected loads. We looked at rebuilding the bodies, replacing the electrical stuff and bogies and building more of them or buying a completely new fleet. The new fleet was only about 10% more expensive and had a full life for all vehicles. No contest really. The only downside was the write off cost of the 83TS but it was the right decision. The 73TS was refurbed separately with a test train being done first and the fleet later. There were some ideas floating around which suggested using redundant 83s to bolster the Picc fleet (by 10 trains) but the same problems of reliability and design existed and, added to the difficulites of having two stocks working on the same line, that killed it.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 5, 2008 9:49:11 GMT
Ok. Paul Moss's book 'Underground Movement' seems to suggest elements of the 83ts refurb/upgrade were used on the 73ts! I'd believe you first however!
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on May 5, 2008 10:21:29 GMT
No...surely not metman?! I think a lot of the replacement is to do with image rather than necessity. Considering LUL is thinking about the reequipment of the 92ts fleet one could make the arguement that its possible to reengineer most of the fleets going. But, ultimately, would that be the best idea? The A stocks have the soundest bodies on the system, but their bogies let them down and their propulsion is outdated. Also their seats are apparently sub-width (it still works though...) and no wheelchair space. So, on the balance of it, they require major changes inside and underneath. I like them because despite the creaks, the screem quality. The seats are proper inbuilt benches, not free standing bus seats as the S stock (which look utterly rubbish and cheap). Luggage racks so one's belongings dont have to get soiled on the invairably dirty floor, umbrella hooks. Amersham man fought hard for such creature comforts, and their ambiance is ten-fold what could hope to be preduced now as a result. But, regrettably, they are the victims of changing requirements. The needs of a modern day metro are very very different from those of half a centuary ago. On balance it would be right to replace them; theyve done 50 years proud, and if given the oppertunity could probably match the standards and 38ts legacy on the IOW of 65+. Its a pity that their replacement seems non-descript and of poorer construction, but thats inevitable, and somewhat subjective too. I just hope prjb wont hit me for saying that! Likewise for the 73ts...Their bodies seem fine, but they fail a lot. Ten more years seems a fair length of time; they'll be getting on for 45 years in service then. Many stocks have been withdrawn in the past early though, often in the interests of standardisation. For example the later batches of the R stock, the 72mk1 and the 83ts. With respect to interiors, the 92ts could be so much better if only it had better seats and brighter lights. What the lack of light does for ones tirdness the seats certainly make up for by keeping one awake in discomfort. Another round of my twopence worth...
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 5, 2008 10:34:13 GMT
Well said young man!
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on May 5, 2008 13:54:56 GMT
For info, AC motors are incredibly reliable - there's hardley anything to go wrong! Out of about 2500 AC motors on the railway, there's been only one failure I know of in just under 10 years. Northern line has had problems with the AC inverters, but this hasn't afflicted the '96 stock. Moreover the cause is now understood and thus can be and will be fixed.
Also, it is only in the last 3-4 years that '73 stock has been giving decent reliability.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2008 18:49:18 GMT
how do you know the s stock are rubbish? they havent been made yet
the A stock are a great peice of engineering really if metrodebt could give them more maintenance they could go on for ages it will be sad when the A's go they should keep a 4 car unit for preservation as an example of 'how to build trains properly'
mind you those 72 stock trains will be going on until 2019!!!! to be honest thats just a joke
btw a60 I want to clarify the reason 1995 stock are the most unreliable is beacause of tubelies lack of maintenance!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2008 18:51:41 GMT
It's Alstom who maintain them (and who have maintained them since they were introduced.) It's a PFI contract.
|
|
a60
I will make the 8100 Class DART my new A Stock.
Posts: 743
|
Post by a60 on May 5, 2008 21:30:58 GMT
Alstom built the ruddy things, surely they'd maintain them to highest standard possible. Shows how much they care for their own trains.
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on May 6, 2008 20:22:27 GMT
I bet the S Stock will be so unreliable, the A Stock will still be in abundance in 2015. Bloody AC Motors, maybe why 95ts is the least reliable fleet of trains on the Tube. Otherwise we will be fed up with the trains, they'll have to go. I don't want to think their journeys to the depot they'll share with (e.g) Q23 & '67 Stocks. I WONT STAND FOR IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Who else agrees with me? If I were a betting man (which I am not) I would take that bet. The 'S' Stock will suffer from teething problems like most new stocks that enter service but there will not be any major issues, thats what the two pre-series trains are for. You will not see 'A' Stock in abundance by 2015, unless you consider a four car unit in the museum to be abundant!
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on May 6, 2008 20:23:42 GMT
What I'm saying is; The S Stock will be so awful, the management will have to send them back to bombardier. If you like 'A' Stock then that is a nice dream, but unfortunately that is all it is my friend!
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on May 6, 2008 20:38:21 GMT
The seats are proper inbuilt benches, not free standing bus seats as the S stock (which look utterly rubbish and cheap). Give us a chance you haven't even seen the finished article yet! For what it's worth I think the 'S' Stock saloon is actually pretty good, and that's not because i am involved in the project - I didn't have an awful lot to do with the saloon design. The interior does look a little too 'C' Stock but that isn't an entirely bad thing as far as I am concerned (ahem! ). Luggage racks so one's belongings dont have to get soiled on the invairably dirty floor, umbrella hooks. Amersham man fought hard for such creature comforts, and their ambiance is ten-fold what could hope to be preduced now as a result. But, regrettably, they are the victims of changing requirements. This is the 21st century and the majority of the time the luggage racks actually just accumulate the Metro. In addition the luggage racks are not the best place to store luggage in a modern fast moving metro system. People forget their bags and then cause security alerts or fight to put them up and then fight to get them down again when they are rarely used. It's not that they are victims of changing requirements either, it's more that their requirements have actually changed. When was the last time you saw a business man with a brief case, bowler hat, and an umbrella? It is rucksacks and fold away bicyles these days! The needs of a modern day metro are very very different from those of half a centuary ago. On balance it would be right to replace them; theyve done 50 years proud, and if given the oppertunity could probably match the standards and 38ts legacy on the IOW of 65+. Its a pity that their replacement seems non-descript and of poorer construction, but thats inevitable, and somewhat subjective too. I just hope prjb wont hit me for saying that! Again, give us a chance! You haven't seen the finished article yet. The 'A' Stock do indeed need replacing and they will end up a design classic just as the 38ts remains, and in time maybe the 'S' Stock will join that group (don't laugh just yet, give it 40 years or so). Remember, the 'T' Stock customers rebelled against the 'A' Stock when it was first introduced! You make some very sound and interesting points so I promise I won't hit you, instead I will leave you with a light hearted: ;D ;D
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on May 6, 2008 21:33:40 GMT
Prjb, you know an aweful lot more about these things than I do, and I absolutely agree with you. The T stock replacement went up against much resistance, as the A stock will too. Most of it will be based on old-versus-new foundations. Some will be valid, most probably not. On the subject of asthetic I have to make this point though: The seats are proper inbuilt benches, not free standing bus seats as the S stock (which look utterly rubbish and cheap). The cheap and rubbish part refered to the use of modern individual bus seats, not the S stock as whole A comparison between the 3+2 seats of A stock and 3+2 seats of class 165 or 313. The individual seats look scruffy and cheaper, whereas if they are built into a fitted bench unit it looks neater. Also the differing widths of bright red externally hung doors. Could the plug door of the cab not been made to end 6 inches higher than the pax doors bottom line, thus avoiding the platform clearance issues (the cab floor raised to match the step)? Those are the only two issues I can say about the S stock atm. Other things are non specific, such as Dot matrix front displays (always way too small and unclear!) and externally hung doors (NY get away without them, but then again we use a different body construction). But thats neither hear nor there! Just wanted to clear up any confusion about that comment though
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,441
|
Post by Chris M on May 6, 2008 21:43:55 GMT
If you raise the cab floor relative to the floor of the passenger saloon you would have issues in the event of needing to detrain passengers through the cab.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on May 6, 2008 22:00:28 GMT
Ah, sorry I was assuming a slight slope on the cab floor. Only raised at the door then leveling off towards the center of the cab then back up to the other side. \_/ but with the inclines gradient greatly reduced of course
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on May 7, 2008 18:17:23 GMT
If only the 8 car trains could have some 2+2 seating-nobody has ever explained to me why this wasn't chosen!
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on May 7, 2008 21:44:37 GMT
I remember seeing some of them in the sidings that connect Ruislip Depot to the Met/Piccy as early as 1974. Little did I know that they would enter revenue service a few weeks after we moved back to the US. I also thought that they would solely be used on the Heathrow services, given that the 1959 stock at the time was 16 yrs old.
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on May 7, 2008 21:54:59 GMT
And speaking of new Piccy trains, will their design have any effect on possible rationalisation at the western end of the line (i.e. giving the District the Uxbridge branch, in exchange for the Picc using Ealing Broadway)?
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,893
|
Post by towerman on Jun 29, 2008 0:35:25 GMT
All I know at the moment is the Picc will be TBTC(Seltrac)same as Jubilee and Northern,the new stock build will be 92 trains and the SCC will be at Acton in the works behind the apprentice centre.
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jun 29, 2008 8:39:45 GMT
How many trains of 73 were built? 87½ was it?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Jun 29, 2008 10:08:17 GMT
I think so. I'm not sure whether that includes the ETT?
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jun 29, 2008 10:23:07 GMT
87 and a half trains were built including the ETT
|
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282
|
Post by Ben on Jun 29, 2008 11:04:33 GMT
Anyone know whether any of the units will be double ended? Interesting to see an increase in the fleet though. Presumably this gives weight to the idea of the Picc keeping the Rayners branch?
|
|
|
Post by c5 on Jun 29, 2008 11:09:38 GMT
Plus a train every 2.5 mins between Acton Town and Arnos Grove!
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jun 29, 2008 13:48:34 GMT
no middle cabs!
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Jul 1, 2008 12:25:14 GMT
Given that The Picc is currently running at 24 tph peak and 18 tph off peak, will the extra units mean more trains per hour, or will they be in reserve?
I can only presume the capacity will increase, especially as T5 is now on a different branch, so to speak, which in turn means a lesser count T123 and 4 bound.
Not that I want to see the back of the 73ts, but a higher capacity especially through The City can only be a good thing.
|
|