|
|
Post by harlesden on Jun 29, 2010 9:19:25 GMT
As far as I know the A60/A62 remain mechanically sound insofar as they continue to handle high speed running.
What were the arguments against
(a) fitting out each train with LO style PA and on board displays
(b) fitting out each car with brand new seat coverings
(c) thoroughly deep cleaning the floor of each car and buffing it up
I don't get much chance to ride on an A60 these days but they're the only real trains LU has ever had
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jun 29, 2010 9:35:27 GMT
I suspect the simplest and most 'catch-all' answer would be the grounds of cost.
The fleet has already had an extensive refurbishment programme, and is speed limited due to a fear of the bogies cracking. There are threads on the Forum that mention the restrictions.
It would also be extremely difficult to retrofit the A stock with the equipment necessary for the signalling upgrade - not technically impossible, but such a maul it wouldn't make economic sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by plasmid on Jun 29, 2010 9:38:59 GMT
Someone mentioned that the bushes were more than worn out on the fleet.
Someone else mentioned that they are too slow and hold up the Chiltern services.
S stock provides an improvment in ride comfort, passenger capacity, air conditioning, passenger safety, acceleration, visibility etc.
Someone mentioned that the new signalling system can only be installed once all S stock trains are in use on all sub-surface lines.
Whilst I admire the A-stock I'm surprised they weren't replaced sooner being 50 years old.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2010 10:01:15 GMT
As far as I know the A60/A62 remain mechanically sound insofar as they continue to handle high speed running. What were the arguments against (a) fitting out each train with LO style PA and on board displays (b) fitting out each car with brand new seat coverings (c) thoroughly deep cleaning the floor of each car and buffing it up I don't get much chance to ride on an A60 these days but they're the only real trains LU has ever had What exactly is your definition of a real train? Unless other LU trains have started doing Thames Clipper journeys, or running along bus routes, then you have made a daft and pointless comment! |
|
|
|
Post by harlesden on Jun 29, 2010 10:50:37 GMT
What exactly is your definition of a real train? Unless other LU trains have started doing Thames Clipper journeys, or running along bus routes, then you have made a daft and pointless comment! Thank you for your polite and respectful feedback. The sentiment is actually featured in the Wikipedia entry for the A60 stock en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_A60_and_A62_StockQUOTE For the convenience of longer distance passengers the A stock is also equipped with luggage racks and umbrella hooks, being the only stock on the system to have these features thus being dubbed as the only proper train on the system.UNQUOTE |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2010 10:58:05 GMT
The S Stock almost certainly won't be more comfortable with the longitudinal seating.
|
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Jun 29, 2010 11:01:54 GMT
I think everyone has their own definition of what a real train is, people on here defend D stock or A stock or 73ts etc to the hilt. Some prefer the old slammers, while some would define a class 378 as a proper train. It's all a matter of personal opinion.
A lot of what is written on Wiki is the opinion of the author, and not necessarily the actual facts, and these things are edited in and out sometimes several times a day.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
Member is Online
|
Post by Chris M on Jun 29, 2010 11:24:00 GMT
Indeed, in the westcountry a "real train" is considered to be a locomotive+coaches (as opposed to a multiple unit) so by this definition, the A-stocks replaced the last "real trains" that LU ran for passengers (it could be argued that the engineers trains topped and tailed by battery locos fulfil this definition of a "real train")
I also don't understand this obsession with transverse seating being integral to passenger comfort. The 378s with their longitudinal seating offer much greater passenger comfort (imho) than the transverse-seated Class 313s.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2010 11:41:20 GMT
I think everyone has their own definition of what a real train is, people on here defend D stock or A stock or 73ts etc to the hilt. Some prefer the old slammers, while some would define a class 378 as a proper train. It's all a matter of personal opinion. As there are opinions over what constitutes a real railway. (is LU? DLR? Tramlink? in whole or partially?) Use of the word 'dubbed' certainly indicates to me that it's an opinion, that isn't held by everyone. |
|
|
|
Post by plasmid on Jun 29, 2010 11:41:29 GMT
The S Stock almost certainly won't be more comfortable with the longitudinal seating. I wasn't referring to the seating, none the less longitudinal seating on the D stock is actually quite comfortable... I was referring to the design of the suspension on the S stock, the design is 50 years newer and makes use of today's technology. There is no way in hell that the A stock will be classified as more comfortable than the S stock. I'm pretty sure that 'prjb' mentioned the comfort levels before in another thread. edit: being bounced off your seat is definitely not comfortable and im confident the S stock will negotiate this better! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2010 13:03:43 GMT
The A stock can certainly get a bit bouncy at times! As a well-proportioned lady, I often have to place my arms at strategic points to avoid injury  I'm fond of the old dears, but luggage racks are hardly relevant to commuters nowadays. The only thing they seem to be used for nowadays is to put spare newspapers on! Also, 50 years is a longer career than most of us are likely to have, so I think they've done their time. The seats may be bigger than on the S stock, but I'm looking forward to not having to squeeze inbetween people sitting either end of a 3-seater, or navigating everyone's legs when changing at Finchley Road... |
|
SE13
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2013
Glorious Gooner
Posts: 9,737
|
Post by SE13 on Jun 29, 2010 13:12:00 GMT
Ah, but less legs in the way with longitudinal seating as the aisles will be wider. Works well enough on 73ts on the Picc. Not to mention faster trains on faster lines and greater tph means the crowding would be less as well.
|
|
cso
Posts: 1,043 
|
Post by cso on Jun 29, 2010 13:18:51 GMT
I like the seating on the A stock, but also think longitudinal seating like other lines would be so much more useful!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jun 29, 2010 17:42:02 GMT
Indeed, in the westcountry a "real train" is considered to be a locomotive+coaches (as opposed to a multiple unit) so by this definition, the A-stocks replaced the last "real trains" that LU ran for passengers (it could be argued that the engineers trains topped and tailed by battery locos fulfil this definition of a "real train") I also don't understand this obsession with transverse seating being integral to passenger comfort. The 378s with their longitudinal seating offer much greater passenger comfort (imho) than the transverse-seated Class 313s. I wasn't impressed with the Capitalstar seating, it was very very hard. I don't mind the 313 seats, they are more compfy, but sometimes the cushon is falling off the seats. I find the A stock seats lovely. My body has molded itself to them, I'm going to miss them greatly. The S stock seating mock up didn't seem to bad, but not as nice as my A60s! I'm going to be living in Harrow soon, so will have less use of the Met. I also will have use of the fast trains to Euston and can get a seat, so no contest really... |
|
