72 Stock to Serve Until 2030's

I like the 72ts. It's quite a treat to go for a ride in them, which I do sometimes to go the the IMW at Elephant. Mind you, I'm a fan of heritage railways, so to have one operating on my doorstep... ;-)

I haven't seen the new MR yet but that suggests quite a delay in the admittedly "broad brush" dates last given for the upgrade. Possibly up to a decade's delay which is dire IMO. The Bakerloo isn't easy to upgrade anyway but that suggests TfL's finances are even more parlous than anyone imagined or else there has been a big scrap which has seen LU expenditure pushed way back in favour of cycling and road investment. So much for investing in infrastructure!

I've no idea what state the 72 stock is in but I'd guess things like corrosion, body fatigue, internal wiring wearing / becoming brittle, motors and bodies would all be concerns. The other issue would be spares - will some components (or equivalents) still be made in 5 years time never mind 20 years? After all LU made much of the escalating costs they face with old stock in their arguments to government and other stakeholders when fighting for the last two financial settlements.

Thought the 1938 stock was done to keep it going in the 80s?



If the answer to that is no there are a few stored at Eastleigh so I suppose these could be stripped for spares. However I think at least some internal features of the 67 stock were taken for use on the Bakerloo I've seen pictures of units with Victoria line blue ventilation controls!

The 1938 stock was never really refurbished in the way that more modern stock was. The thing that you are referring to was called an EHO (Extra Heavy Overhaul). To me, a true refurbishment significantly changes the internal appearance of a train - this never really happened with the1938 stock.

In reality, is it not likely the 73 stock from the Piccadilly may move over - this is more reliable and of a more modern design.

Would it fit?
The 73 stock cars are longer than those of the 72 stock (DMs 1382mm longer, UNDM/Ts 1699mm^[1]). I think there are some tight bends on the Bakerloo around Paddington and particularly around the crossover at Piccadilly Circus.

[1] DM 17473mm vs 16091mm, UNDM/T 17676mm vs 15977mm. Source: Tubeprune www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Dimensions.htm which also has details for centre and end throw.

The crossover at Piccadilly Circus has been used for several days at a time because of emergency track repairs in the past.

More than a shave would be necessary with those dimensions.

73 stock had to have the grabrails above the doors replaced to pull the roof down to fit on the Piccadilly Line.

Just noticed this sorry!

My data comes from TfL's site: www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/modesoftransport/londonunderground/1592.aspx

Actually it seems to have not been updated for a few months now :/



I have a question relating to the Bakerloo's stock. Is it really in such poor physical condition that it must be rebuilt *now*, instead waiting and becoming the first to receive new stock?

To quote PoP of London Reconnections:

Is it effectively the necessary inventment in the Bloos stock, then, thats the nail in the coffin for the 73ts, ultimately?

just a couple of questions:

1. what exactly do you mean by rewelding?
2. When can we expect to see a prototype or infact a fully refurbished 72ts unit?
3. When will the 73 stock be replaced now that it seems the 72s will be rewelded?

First 1972 Stock goes to Acton Works soon as Train 1 for the "Life Extension Project".

I don't really see it that way. The Piccadilly Line should have been part way through its upgrade by now if things had stayed on their original programme. Obviously an awful lot has changed since then but the problem is that the old maintenance and refurbishment assumptions were designed on an assumed withdrawal date for the 73 stock. That has now been somewhat stretched by a few years meaning that the 73s have to limp along in service for a few more years. In addition there is the issue of the Picc line's signalling system (even ignoring the shared bits with SSL) and the ancient control system. I believe something has been done to "patch" the control system a bit (Centralised Train Following System??) to give the controllers a bit more info on where the trains are. I expect there are also issues with power supplies (traction and signalling) and track and depots which an upgrade would pull together in one renewal / enhancement package.

Nonetheless for such an intensively used service that supports travel to / from Heathrow, many suburbs and a vast slice of the West End there comes a point when you can't delay any more. There has also been considerable political pressure on the Mayor to get this upgrade off the starting blocks and give it funding. The recent SSL signalling developments create both risk and an opportunity as to what you do with the Picc Line alongside SSR services in West London. It remains to be seen what precisely emerges in terms of a co-ordinated plan once LU has re-awarded the SSR signalling contract. I expect LU does have a plan to adjust service patterns but whatever it decides to do will have advantages and disadvantages and the key will be to pitch the proposals in such a way that people don't feel deprived.

In comparison the Bakerloo has long been a "make do and mend" line with hand me down rolling stock and a low profile compared to other lines. It was always at the back of the queue for the Line Upgrades so it's no surprise that the Government has effectively twisted Boris's arm that it will allow the start of the Picc Upgrade but won't give a commitment to a wider programme of upgrades. The 72 stock is 40+ years old and it should be heading to the scrap heap but instead it has to soldier on. Given their age it is no surprise that some level of remedial action will be required - probably to underframes, bogies and bodywork but I am guessing about the parts that need attention. Given the Bakerloo is quiet (a relative term given how busy LU is overall) compared to other routes it's no surprise there is less pressure to upgrade it. I expect that the Mayor probably thinks the Bakerloo's issues can be resolved alongside a decision to extend it into South London. I'm not convinced myself as I think any extension proposal will be bitterly fought over because each council will want a new line in "their" area [1] while outer Boroughs will want guarantees they won't lose their main line commuter links to the City / Charing Cross [2]. Further, pressure to build Crossrail 2 will inevitably shove any Bakerloo line extension way down the funding queue. The only hope is if we get a change of Mayor and Government that takes a rather different view to funding TfL than the current set up.

[1] one extension can't serve Camberwell, North Peckham, Old Kent Road, Peckham, New Cross and Lewisham on one alignment! All these areas are busy and have been cited in past studies for Bakerloo extensions.
[2] will the residents of Hayes (or wherever) want to travel to town on a tube train when their existing heavy rail services are jammed full in the peaks? Doubtful. There are usually trade offs when tube lines are built - other services get reduced to produce savings especially if the tube lines takes over / replicates existing NR services.

TfL have just issued new papers for the Finance and Policy Committee that includes an update on the New Tube for London plans.

Meeting Papers

Enjoy