|
|
Post by crusty54 on Oct 15, 2014 8:44:11 GMT
Too many design flaws and using untried parts and ideas
Just not ever likely to last
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 15, 2014 9:46:55 GMT
As for the 59 stock, remember when that replaced the standard stock on the Central. The 59's were always 8 cars. 1959 stock was seven cars, the very simlar 1962 stock was eight cars. 1959 stock only ran briefly on the Central to cover a rolling stock shortage until the 1962 stock was ready. the 1959 stock then went to the Piccadilly as originally intended, (and later on the Northern and Bakerloo). |
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Oct 15, 2014 9:55:52 GMT
As for the 59 stock, remember when that replaced the standard stock on the Central. The 59's were always 8 cars. 1959 stock was seven cars, the very simlar 1962 stock was eight cars. 1959 stock only ran briefly on the Central to cover a rolling stock shortage until the 1962 stock was ready. the 1959 stock then went to the Piccadilly as originally intended, (and later on the Northern and Bakerloo). I seem to recall reading that Metro Cammel built enough extra NDMs to make the 59TS up to 8 cars for temporary service on the Central line. These NDMs were then retained for use in 62TS trains when the 59s returned to the Piccadilly line as 7 car units. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Oct 15, 2014 10:11:23 GMT
I seem to recall reading that Metro Cammel built enough extra NDMs to make the 59TS up to 8 cars for temporary service on the Central line. These NDMs were then retained for use in 62TS trains when the 59s returned to the Piccadilly line as 7 car units. That is what I read. One three car 1962 stock train was built, officially for the Aldwych shuttle although in practice I think it could work in a seven car train and any 3 car 1959 stock could work the branch. It had originally been intended to develop a separate design for the Central (of which the 1960 stock was the prototype) but the rapid deterioration in the early 1960s of the Standard stock (which had not been looked after very well when stored during the early 1940s awaiting the delayed conversion to 4-rail and extension of the Central Line) meant a repeat order of 1959 stock was rushed through instead - this became the 1962 stock |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Oct 15, 2014 10:18:21 GMT
1959 stock was seven cars, the very simlar 1962 stock was eight cars. 1959 stock only ran briefly on the Central to cover a rolling stock shortage until the 1962 stock was ready. the 1959 stock then went to the Piccadilly as originally intended, (and later on the Northern and Bakerloo). I seem to recall reading that Metro Cammel built enough extra NDMs to make the 59TS up to 8 cars for temporary service on the Central line. These NDMs were then retained for use in 62TS trains when the 59s returned to the Piccadilly line as 7 car units. Thanks for the correction  |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Oct 15, 2014 17:37:00 GMT
The 92 stock was so radically different from any train preceding it in terms of technology so yes, it was always going to be a challenge. However, bring built on the cheap was the biggest issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by uzairjubilee on Oct 15, 2014 21:33:56 GMT
I like them! Yes the trains do have their fair share of issues, but personally when I think of how many passengers they've carried over the line since their introduction, I think they've done incredibly well.
|
|
|
|
Post by A60stock on Oct 16, 2014 18:21:29 GMT
one thing i have never understood about LU's concept
they have refurbished the 95 stock and the 96 i think will also be before the 92s. The 92 clearly need a major refurb (as do the 72s!). Why is their logic the wrong way around? Maybe im not understanding something but surely the money used to refurb the 95 stock could have been used for the 92s instead (or even 72s) and then after that, refurb the 95s
Also the 96 stock is receiving new front destination indicators, again, why not the 92 stock? the 96 stocks ones are already much clearer to read so again it seems like the priorities have been mixed!
still nice to see money is being spent on these features at least!
|
|
|
|
Post by antharro on Oct 16, 2014 21:55:09 GMT
I like them. There's just something about how they "feel" that I like. It's the motor sound, the way they ride. Plus they were built by BREL, which generally gets a thumbs up from me. Don't care for the current moquette though - doesn't suit them at all. I much preferred the previous red version. I know they have their build quality issues; I've always felt that all the R&D money was put into their technological capabilities and the build quality was an afterthought. It would be nice to see them a get a really thorough overhaul; a bit of a mainline HGR + C4 + C6X (heavy repair - chassis etc, underfloor equipment + repaint + seats etc, basically a full overhaul) at the same time, but given the amount of money TfL are spending at the moment on other stocks, I expect they'll get the minimum needed to keep them going and in reasonable condition.
|
|
