1992TS opinion

I also like it...

I do not see what issues people have with them

Basically the motors flash over fairly regularly (at one point they were doing 20 a week) and the gearboxes have had bearing problems. I do not spend much time on the stock so I can't say they are liked/hated, but I for one quite like them. They provide a lot of work for REW

It is my favourite stock to ride on and I will purposely go for a ride on the central every time I go down to London. My favourite DEV DVD from video 125.

I do like the interior and the sound the train makes on arriving and departing stations. And the Emma Clarke? Dva announcements are the best too.

I like them a lot for numerous reasons. First of all, I'm young enough never to have known any other train on the Central line, which has always been my local line. So, for me, they are obviously intricately connected with childhood memories, journeys into London, travelling on the tube and all of that, so I'm quite attached to them sentimentally I also think they look very nice and it is quite true that they've shifted a lot of people around. I also find the ATP/O system the best out there, the Vic's 2009s stop as if they've hit the buffers and TBTC is just awful in my opinion, Auto drives like a 7 year old. POWER. Oooops, bother, gone a bit far there, BRAKES. Oh no, what a surprise, all of a sudden I'm going to slow. I wonder why. Ah well, let's solve it with some POWER. The 92s stop quite nicely, near constant braking most of the time until just at the end where they ease off the brakes for what is generally quite a nice stop and they don't drive like a child on a simulator.

However, realistically, they are awful. Lots of people don't like them for good reasons, which will be provided in due course, I'm sure. Firstly, while Auto is better on the 92s it still isn't fantastic, take a trip between Leytonstone and Mile End on the west and feel it hit the target speed, especially on the long run between Stratford and Mile End. Brakes...brakes...brakes...brakes...brakes. Just stabbing at the brakes every few seconds. Also it can't handle the rain. Just a hint of water and it'll stop, well, wherever it feels like. Happily this isn't a problem because it's very rarely wet in London, but on those extremely few occasions where it does rain - the last time was 2005 I think, maybe someone will correct me - then that can be a problem. The system really isn't very sophisticated at all, if we're honest. Can't handle the rain, can't do rail gap indicators, can't do sidings, misses the stopping marks even in the dry a little bit too often, can't actually prevent you from having a SPAD, just gets the emergency brakes on if you do, doesn't drive as well as a human can, and very often it'll drop out and the train will pull up in a heap - very hard may I add - and the human'll have to take it the rest of the way in. I'm sure I've missed a few things.

The stock is outrageously unreliable. It was built to a bit of a budget from what I've heard and it really shows. It had some substantial teething problems when it was first introduced, if I recall correctly, and then there was Chancery Lane, which was just unforgivable. The entire fleet grounded. No Central and no Waterloo & City for a fair while and then it took a long time before the service was fully up and running on the Central. As has been mentioned no more 100 kph running after that (although that is set to come back).

Although WTT 67 - which can only have been dreamt up by someone without a passing acquaintance with reality - has to take some of the blame for the strain it's putting on the trains, the fact is they weren't exactly the height of achievement when they were built and now they are a bit older they're really struggling. Trains are being cancelled like nobody's business, the number of defects in service is just not on. Take a look at some of ASLEF shrugged's recent posts for more - click for an example.

But I find them very comfortable, very pretty, very useful and they do get the job done - or at least they did until WTT 67 came along - albeit with really quite a lot of fuss

Good sound too imho.

I forgot about the windows. Strange detail, but you can see really well out of a 92, which is nice since the Central has some really lovely sights. You can see almost nothing out of the tiny little windows they have on the 2009s, you have to stand by the doors if you want to see out, can't see anything from the seats. Good job there's not very much to see between stations down there

I agree, lovely from a passenger viewpoint (at least in the dry, when they're working) but a lot of negatives objectively speaking. Don't get me wrong they're my favourites, I just see their faults. Oh, and it can be hard to read the destination on the front, too, especially when dirty.

Oh I've no doubt, but stabbing at the brakes? I find Auto offers a generally smooth ride and, though I don't like admitting it, sometimes it's nicer than homo sapiens, or at the least more consistent. But I think not as sophisticated as a person and there are T/Ops who can really make a 1992 stop exquisitely softly.

Overall I agree it'sthe best out there, but there're a lot of can'ts. Two consecutive station skips anyone?

Coded is generally relatively nicely done, I think, it's a good compromise system, in fact I'd go as far to say that the ATP is pretty good on the Central. Not as clever as a moving block system, but much more effective than the moving block system in use on LU, it seems to me. However the fixed blocks do bring advantages, especially for manual driving. It's the ATO I really have a problem with, but then I do have a little bit of an agenda on that point and objectively I can't deny that in beautiful, bone dry weather (though in the pipe I think it brakes a little too hard and a little too late to be really comfortable, but I suppose you've gotta keep those headways down) it is a nice stop and it doesn't generally drive poorly between stations.

I am happy, though, to concede that this is all obviously from the passenger perspective and I'm far less qualified to talk about it from the operator's perspective.


I actually really like the Emma Clarke announcements. The way she does Tottenham Court Road (and, to a lesser extent, Oxford Circus, Bond Street and Notting Hill Gate) is wonderfully lyrical

so far we have had all the likes about 1992 tube stock, now for the reason why they are disliked by me........................

its the seat bays, which have been pushed forward from the car body, making the cars feel more claustrophobic then any other underground train in history.

Because they have fallen short of the mark on a number of occasions with the whole fleet was withdrawn for many weeks about 10 or so years ago because of traction motor issues, then was the cab sticky tape saga and the impression that the stock was built on the cheap!

For me the seats are one of the least comfortable on the combine, although the tip-up seats on the 2009 stock are probably now the worst.

Overall, I think the 1992 stock was well designed, but poorly constructed meaning that they are showing their age in many respects.

There are more than just mounting issues. The mounts work under such loads that they tend to flashover fairly often.

Are the 1992 stock motors DC?

I don't mind the 92 stock and I guess they are last on the list to be replaced by about 2035?

Yes, last LU stock to be delivered with DC motors.

From what I've heard the Central Line will receive the new trains after the Piccadilly but before the Bakerloo so we're looking sometime after 2025 with the 1972 stock in service until the 2030s.

I remember the D stock replacing the old R stock on the District, the R stock looked like it was wearing flares so they were well out of fashion by 1980. I'm due to retire around the time the new stock could be introduced on the Central so I could be trained to drive driverless trains just before I start drawing my pension.