|
|
Post by A60stock on Jan 30, 2015 22:40:01 GMT
Forgive me if this has already been discussed but:
what was the point of refurbishing the d stock to such an extent? Surely it would have been a better and more cost effective to have instead have externally painted the units into LU livery and on the inside, have conducted a refresh, similar to that of the 1992 stock, i.e. changed seat covers and some newer flooring and perhaps some new paint, was there such a need for the DVA etc to have been installed, car end windows wouldnt have seemed to necessary neither as the stock only needed to run for an additional 9-10 years?
Externally, was there a need for the side destination indicators or a need to replace the roller blinds for such a short period of further use? DDA requirements arent required until 2020 so it just interests me as to why such an extensive refurb was carried out when on the other hand, stock like the 1972ts was refurbished much earlier and despite its older age, still doesnt have car end windows nor dot matrix indicators?
|
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jan 31, 2015 3:59:11 GMT
The decision to replace the trains was taken after they were refurbished and bogies replaced.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 31, 2015 8:12:43 GMT
The D Stock refurbishment project was started much earlier, with the trial unit 7008, being taken into Acton Works in 1999.
During its long fit-out it was decided to scale back the actual work to be only cosmetic rather than mechanical due to the impending arrival of the now ordered replacement S Stock.
Hence the unit was vinyl covered, drivers desk remained as built, destination box remained but with LED fittings inside, the side destination boxes were squeezed between the double glass windows, only the trailer car had the full interior makeover, very few mechanical enhancements were added.
The programe was projected so that the first production ones went away in 2003 to Wakefield, later Derby, the poor finish vinyl cover was replaced with proper paint, (the first 3 returning differed in actual livery applied). The last units return to London in 2008 after the project was slowed considerably.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744 
|
Post by class411 on Jan 31, 2015 8:30:20 GMT
What was the timing for the installation - discontinued usage - covering up, of the passenger operated door mechanisms?
Was it the installation or cover-up that was done outside the refurbishment?
I'm sure this has been mentioned here before, but why was the scheme abandoned?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 31, 2015 8:58:11 GMT
As built the D Stock were fitted with passenger door control for opening only, except trial refurb car 17008 which also had internal 'close' buttons fitted but never connected.
I remember the warm summers of 1981/82/83 working D Stock without the opening windows and the poor (as fitted) ventilation system failing to reduce the heat inside the cars, resulting in many passengers fainting during those warm morning peak-hours. Something had to be done, hence car 7108 fitted with the trial windows and grilles, then the entire fleet (except unit 7129) being retrofitted in Birmingham or Acton (double-enders).
As a further heat reduction method, operation of the doors was taken over entirely by the Guard during the summer months May-October for a few years. This caused utter confusion during the changeover period as some trains had been converted others hadn't! With passengers standing waiting for the doors to open which they had done the previous week. The reverse happening in the winter.
The system reverted to Guard, or maybe Operator by that time, one summer and never got changed back. The actual date escapes me.
During refurbishment the external buttons were removed and plated over, the internal ones disappeared as new panels were fitted.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,744
|
Post by class411 on Jan 31, 2015 10:41:22 GMT
As built the D Stock were fitted with passenger door control for opening only, except trial refurb car 17008 which also had internal 'close' buttons fitted but never connected. I remember the warm summers of 1981/82/83 working D Stock without the opening windows and the poor (as fitted) ventilation system failing to reduce the heat inside the cars, resulting in many passengers fainting during those warm morning peak-hours. Something had to be done, hence car 7108 fitted with the trial windows and grilles, then the entire fleet (except unit 7129) being retrofitted in Birmingham or Acton (double-enders). As a further heat reduction method, operation of the doors was taken over entirely by the Guard during the summer months May-October for a few years. This caused utter confusion during the changeover period as some trains had been converted others hadn't! With passengers standing waiting for the doors to open which they had done the previous week. The reverse happening in the winter. The system reverted to Guard, or maybe Operator by that time, one summer and never got changed back. The actual date escapes me. During refurbishment the external buttons were removed and plated over, the internal ones disappeared as new panels were fitted. Thanks for that info. I've realised that I was misremembering (which is why I thought that the D-Stock had been converted to passenger door operation). I used R Stock from time to time, then started using D-Stock regularly, for a year, just after it was introduced. |
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Jan 31, 2015 11:19:20 GMT
Don't forget that prior to the refurbishment they had the grooved maple floors. This is just an educated guess, but I think they would have had to be replaced because of the fire regulations (related to the Kings cross fire I believe) even if they were only going to be around for a short time.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 31, 2015 13:18:27 GMT
No I believe the D stock interior performed well and it was management who wanted the D stock image to be brought inline with the rest of the fleet of trains.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 31, 2015 13:50:13 GMT
Certainly some work was required as a result of the King's Cross Fire Report, interior melamine panels, wooden floors etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigvern on Jan 31, 2015 17:38:01 GMT
The D stock refurbishment did not include complete rewire, unlike the 73 TS when they were refurbished.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 31, 2015 18:59:56 GMT
Covering some of the points made;
1. The D stock Refurb was an LUL requirement within the ill fated PPP contract. As mentioned the aspiration was for early improvement in the ambience of the trains and the opportunity to improve fire performance. The successful SSL bid, from Metronet, involved refurbishing D stock as an early task, for an intended further 8-10 years service before replacement by the S stock. As it's turned out that is about right. The median refurb was some time in 2007 and the median S7 on to the District line will be some time in 2015. A plan fulfilled !!!
2. With that plan, the scope of work was rather less than on the other LUL refurbs undertaken in the 1990s which were intended for approximately another 20 years use.
3. The project logs don't support the contention that the last few D78 refurbs were on a slowed programme. In fact the first one was about a year late to a very ambitious target, but the last one was 11 months early.
4. Yes LUL were helpful over the door buttons in the refurb design phase. Having determined that they were very unlikely to re-introduce use of Passenger Open during the remaining life of D78 stock, they agreed that the buttons could be removed altogether. The agreed scope had not included new ones, so the old ones would have looked a bit tatty in all the new panels and paint. One example of when the PPP was operated sensibly... Several examples on the project where it was less so, but I'll stay quiet for now ;-)
|
|
