Piccadilly Line Upgrade threat

Why not give the Northern new-built ATO-fitted trains and send the 1995's on to the Piccadilly?

Problem with that though is then youre building 106 new trains instead of 93, and then you have an extra 13 from the 95ts above and beyond those needed for spare.

Doubt if it'll be cancelled as it's part of the PPP contract,may be delayed though.

A few months' ago LU were desparate to get various signal operator grades to identify whether they wanted redeployment, severence or retirement following the impending closure of Cobourg St and the manual cabins, now suddenly the pressure's off and all it's all on the back burner.

True, but the Picc has perhaps the most competent and dedicated signal maintenance staff anywhere on the railway. I have to say that having been one of those in that elite group. There is still plenty of kit that is much older than 50years on the Picc including many of the points but one has to remember that until relatively recently most equipment was routinely changed every 5-10 years and even now I would not expect any of the safety equipment to be more than 15 years old. Cables of course do deteriorate over time and most of the Picc is cabled in lead which has seen better days and requires replacement although much of the internal wiring had to be replaced just a few years ago to overcome aging issues.

[/quote]]Though the later the upgrade takes, the better as it will mean a significant number of people won't be looking for new jobs![/quote]

Well I'm not so sure about that either, the Picc ran lean (with vacancies) in terms of signal maintenance staff and probably still does, so many TOs having moved to outside contractors prior to and during shadow running and many doubling their wages in the process inviting others to follow!

Like Astock5000 says, there isn't really a need to replace the lovely 1973 stock, so I am very happy indeed! Money well saved.

Absolutely! There is nothing wrong with the 73ts, and the longer it remains in service, the better!

There was a notice up at Ash House this week referring to the rumours and articles - I haven't got the exact wording to hand, but it basically said "Duh, the upgrade is a requirement of the contract between Tubelines and LU, so it can't be dropped just like that."

How can they have become so unreliable? Is it just equipment?

I agree with this, except that I would say that the Met and the District don't have many delays due to faulty trains. If an SSL train breaks down, it's probably a C stock. (Yes, I do know there was a faulty train on the District on Friday - but that could have been C stock, as it was at Wimbledon Park).

I think LT (as was) had a soft spot for the 73TS as their image was long-used in advertising campaigns even though the ugly snub-nosed 83TS were newer (and you would expect the most modern trains to be promoted).

A similar situation exists today where the 95/96TS family are being used on posters. What's wrong with the 09TS? (As their image is already in the public doman.)

It could be that LU aren't ready to 'launch' that image until successful passenger running has occured, but might it also be the case that the marketing people dislike the bland slab-sided cars which exhibit no design flair (or 'flare' for that matter). Mind you the Q Stock were slab-sided and I don't many forum members would object to their return!

They even show 95/96TS on posters about the Victoria line's upgrade.

If you want to see what a fake warp (wrap) around widow looks like, look at a main line class 442 - it looks good from the outside, but from the inside it's ridiculous.

What are the main engineering reasons for the demise of wrap-around windows? Is it purly a missile stopping thing?