|
|
Post by A60stock on Jan 28, 2021 10:55:16 GMT
Having been reading about the plans to retraction the 92 stock and the recent retractioning for the class 455 (SWR)/class 321 (the ones with Greater Anglia) in another forum, I was wondering why such a strategy has not been considered for the 72 stock, given that they are much older than either the 92 or class 455/321 and unlike the class 455/321 there are no plans to replace them anytime soon.
I know people will say what's the point when they're going to be replaced in the next 10 years, however, the class 455 will only see around 5 years of using their new traction packages and from what I have read, has already generated significant cost savings and enough to recoup the initial investment through far less costs being spent on maintenance and of course, far better reliability. However, yes, I do appreciate budgets are tight right now but long run, a saving could be made?
Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 28, 2021 11:51:43 GMT
I have no direct knowledge on whether a re-tractioning has ever been considered. I'll start the ball rolling with a few thoughts though;
- Bakerloo line is not as important as most other lines so service disruptions have less value (Sorry real users)
- The traction motors on 72TS may have longer economic life than the LT130s on 92TS. Thus tending to favour 'no change'.
- It may be easier to keep the electro mechanical traction package going semi indefinitely than the electronics packages on 92TS.
- I think the re-tractioned Class 321s were aimed at further use somewhere else after Greater Anglia. Hence why only some were done.
|
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Jan 28, 2021 13:40:56 GMT
The 92 stock is quite a special case I believe?
Built to a cost much more heavily than most LU stuff, so lots of weaknesses have shown early
The control technology was new at the time and replacement parts are not easily obtained as the technology has moved on
The automated train system gives them a very hard life
They were bought at the time LU ridership started to rise, and they have had much more use than might have been envisaged
For the 72 stock, how much can be robbed off the Piccadilly line 73 stock? If there is a big pool of free spares on the horizon that might influence decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 28, 2021 13:54:28 GMT
The 92 stock is quite a special case I believe? Built to a cost much more heavily than most LU stuff, so lots of weaknesses have shown early The control technology was new at the time and replacement parts are not easily obtained as the technology has moved on The automated train system gives them a very hard life They were bought at the time LU ridership started to rise, and they have had much more use than might have been envisaged For the 72 stock, how much can be robbed off the Piccadilly line 73 stock? If there is a big pool of free spares on the horizon that might influence decisions. Actually the 92 stock is built lighter than most rather than heavier. The weight control was to keep to contract and hence minimise the need to enhance the traction supply whist still giving higher performance than the 62TS they replaced. Some stuff from 73TS could be used or cannibalised as components for 72TS. Also there was salvage from the 72Mk1 and 67TS scrapping. And indeed there are suppliers for wearing components of most of the electro mechanical traction switchgear. |
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jan 28, 2021 19:51:56 GMT
The Bakerloo trains have an easy life. Last I saw they annually ran an average 102,867km each, compared to Central line 153,615km, or about half as far again. It mounts up over the years!
|
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Jan 29, 2021 17:35:12 GMT
The 92 stock is quite a special case I believe? Built to a cost much more heavily than most LU stuff, so lots of weaknesses have shown early The control technology was new at the time and replacement parts are not easily obtained as the technology has moved on The automated train system gives them a very hard life They were bought at the time LU ridership started to rise, and they have had much more use than might have been envisaged For the 72 stock, how much can be robbed off the Piccadilly line 73 stock? If there is a big pool of free spares on the horizon that might influence decisions. Actually the 92 stock is built lighter than most rather than heavier. The weight control was to keep to contract and hence minimise the need to enhance the traction supply whist still giving higher performance than the 62TS they replaced. Some stuff from 73TS could be used or cannibalised as components for 72TS. Also there was salvage from the 72Mk1 and 67TS scrapping. And indeed there are suppliers for wearing components of most of the electro mechanical traction switchgear. apologies for the large re-quoting - "heavily" was not meant in mass terms there, but in emphasis terms - As I Understand It, the central line stock was built with cost much more of a priority over quality than previous LU stocks. |
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Jan 29, 2021 17:42:10 GMT
The Bakerloo trains have an easy life. Last I saw they annually ran an average 102,867km each, compared to Central line 153,615km, or about half as far again. It mounts up over the years! the 72 stock has therefore run for ~50 years. 102867/153615 gives 0.6696 (to 4 significant figures), which would suggest that central line stock should take 33.48 years to reach the same mileage. They've done ~30 years, so they are only about 3 years off the same mileage/age point, which isn't bad given the 72 stock was an evolution of previous designs, and with (apparently) a less cost-driven programme. |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 29, 2021 18:31:08 GMT
The PCM on the 72s is tried and tested and there were plenty of spares available from the 67/72mk1 fleet. I guess there are plenty of spares as required still.
As said the stock has an easy life in mass transit terms.
The traction/control equipment is quite specialist as based on the 67 stock duplicates the camshaft bank due to the requirements of automatic operation. Ultimately, it’s probably not worth the upgrade on a smaller fleet of trains to achieve the relative savings.
On a personal note I’ve love the PCM and DC motors so long may they continue!
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jan 30, 2021 7:59:43 GMT
Metman...... the use of two camshafts was to facilitate rheostatic braking, not ATO.
|
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jan 30, 2021 8:32:25 GMT
A lot of the bits on the 72 stock can be constantly repaired as needed, where more modern stuff needs to be replaced new.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Jan 30, 2021 12:27:33 GMT
Metman...... the use of two camshafts was to facilitate rheostatic braking, not ATO. And with a few more years' thought applied the 73TS has a single version of the same machine, longer shaft and more switch elements. Looking back, I suspect the original use of two camshafts was to get the development proving done by modifying existing camshaft machines so they needed two to get enough contacts and they just stuck with it for 67TS, C stock and 72TS builds. Not the most efficient use of kit, but the supplier was probably happy to sell more of it! Maybe project programmes had an impact too. |
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 30, 2021 19:24:48 GMT
Thanks. Wasn’t sure if the C stock had the same layout.
|
|
|
|
Post by bigvern on Jan 31, 2021 7:58:00 GMT
The other thing about retractioning is the physical size of the underframe, any modern traction requires cooling and the large steel underframe would make fitting equipment difficult and very expensive for a small fleet,modern trains the uñdersides of the car are flat so gives a much wider space, considering the PCM equipment was developed on the 1935 TS its design lasted until builds in the 1980's not a bad legacy,
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Feb 1, 2021 0:06:32 GMT
I presume the Bakerloo kept sufficient spares from the Vic line redundant stock for expected requirements. But how long did they provide for? Current life expectation for the 1972TS seems to be open-ended. And has actual requirement matched original expectations? Storage must be costly in space, limiting how much can be kept. Where is it all held? Around London, or in a lower cost area?
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 1, 2021 7:27:52 GMT
There are all sorts of spaces around the LU estate where things may be stored. For example many substations are housed in buildings designed for large rotary converters. Today's electronic cubstations occupy a tiny proportion of the space. I recall as a trainee visiting a substation, also designated as a sub-stores where they were keeping equipment for a cancelled major electrical upgrade of Q stock ....sorry, wandered off topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 1, 2021 9:50:03 GMT
There are all sorts of spaces around the LU estate where things may be stored. For example many substations are housed in buildings designed for large rotary converters. Today's electronic cubstations occupy a tiny proportion of the space. I recall as a trainee visiting a substation, also designated as a sub-stores where they were keeping equipment for a cancelled major electrical upgrade of Q stock ....sorry, wandered off topic. Sometimes the problem is stopping well meaning accountants and commercial types scrapping it before you need it! |
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 1, 2021 11:47:01 GMT
Indeed, the accountants wanted to scrap spares to reduce working capital many years ago, despite protestations that the simplest thing to do was to revalue the items as £0. In the end a communication plan was set up to advise the fleet people that items that hadn't been in demand for years would be scrapped. Somehow, demand for these items surged!
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Feb 2, 2021 1:27:49 GMT
The latest financial plan submitted for Government funding suggests that the Bakerloo trains could last until 2040, when new trains would follow for the Central line, although earlier replacement is preferred. |
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,968
|
Post by towerman on Apr 30, 2021 13:44:40 GMT
Having been reading about the plans to retraction the 92 stock and the recent retractioning for the class 455 (SWR)/class 321 (the ones with Greater Anglia) in another forum, I was wondering why such a strategy has not been considered for the 72 stock, given that they are much older than either the 92 or class 455/321 and unlike the class 455/321 there are no plans to replace them anytime soon. I know people will say what's the point when they're going to be replaced in the next 10 years, however, the class 455 will only see around 5 years of using their new traction packages and from what I have read, has already generated significant cost savings and enough to recoup the initial investment through far less costs being spent on maintenance and of course, far better reliability. However, yes, I do appreciate budgets are tight right now but long run, a saving could be made? Thoughts? Because the PCM has proved reliable over the past 75 years if it ain't broke don't fix it. |
|
|
|
Post by grumpycat on Aug 9, 2021 3:01:34 GMT
any news on the refurb on the units. I know that one was fitted with LED lighting but any other news?
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286 
|
Post by rincew1nd on Aug 9, 2021 6:46:06 GMT
I thought CLIP was the Central Line Improvement Programme; the 92ts upgrades being done in the new shed at Acton.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Aug 9, 2021 7:27:42 GMT
The TfL Programmes & Investment Committee meeting in March 2021 was told that by the end of 2021 the Bakerloo line should see the completion of eight trains with LED lighting, wheelchair bays and RVAR compliant grab poles, with a complete Passenger Information System installation on one train.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Aug 9, 2021 12:44:05 GMT
The TfL Programmes & Investment Committee meeting in March 2021 was told that by the end of 2021 the Bakerloo line should see the completion of eight trains with LED lighting, wheelchair bays and RVAR compliant grab poles, with a complete Passenger Information System installation on one train. Compliance as far as the trains are concerned but step free access to the platforms on the line is minimal. I don't know if they've managed to produce a working ramp design for the stations north of Queens Park to get wheelchairs on and off the trains. |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Aug 20, 2021 11:10:46 GMT
Not directly linked to the refurbs, but I have been amazed at the number of lights which haven’t been working inside the trains recently. Almost every train I have seen has lights out in every carriage, with some having almost half not working.
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Aug 20, 2021 16:16:43 GMT
Not directly linked to the refurbs, but I have been amazed at the number of lights which haven’t been working inside the trains recently. Almost every train I have seen has lights out in every carriage, with some having almost half not working. This has been a long standing issue, with this stock only if some one or some organisation takes details of the car numbers time and place of trains and submits this via the prober channels will this be addressed. |
|
|
|
Post by Westinghouse on Aug 20, 2021 17:30:29 GMT
Not directly linked to the refurbs, but I have been amazed at the number of lights which haven’t been working inside the trains recently. Almost every train I have seen has lights out in every carriage, with some having almost half not working. This is indeed a long standing issue, It stems from the instructions for drivers to flash the lights on and off as part of the detainment process. This blows the starters for the fluorescent tubes. Depots say don't flash the lights, management instructions say flash the lights. Yet another example of departments not working together. I have taken trains out of service with less than 50% lighting as set out in the 'defective in service instructions' only for them to be back the next day, exactly the same. Eventually you stop reporting things like this as they just don't get fixed. The LED upgrades will eventually fix this issue, you can't make them flash on and of either |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Aug 20, 2021 22:21:51 GMT
The TfL Programmes & Investment Committee meeting in March 2021 was told that by the end of 2021 the Bakerloo line should see the completion of eight trains with LED lighting, wheelchair bays and RVAR compliant grab poles, with a complete Passenger Information System installation on one train. Compliance as far as the trains are concerned but step free access to the platforms on the line is minimal. I don't know if they've managed to produce a working ramp design for the stations north of Queens Park to get wheelchairs on and off the trains. At some stations the height difference between train floor and platform is so great that any sort of ramp would need to be dangerously steep. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Aug 21, 2021 5:35:25 GMT
Compliance as far as the trains are concerned but step free access to the platforms on the line is minimal. I don't know if they've managed to produce a working ramp design for the stations north of Queens Park to get wheelchairs on and off the trains. At some stations the height difference between train floor and platform is so great that any sort of ramp would need to be dangerously steep. More than some stations. The prototype ramp didn't leave enough room inside the train to get a wheelchair on or off. The creation of wheelchair spaces on the trains may allow an angled ramp to be used. However, the lack of lifts at most of the stations makes it a fairly pointless exercise. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Aug 21, 2021 15:22:26 GMT
Not directly linked to the refurbs, but I have been amazed at the number of lights which haven’t been working inside the trains recently. Almost every train I have seen has lights out in every carriage, with some having almost half not working. This has been a long standing issue, with this stock only if some one or some organisation takes details of the car numbers time and place of trains and submits this via the prober channels will this be addressed. I did, and nothing was ever done. |
|
|
|
Post by wanstead on Aug 30, 2021 12:49:30 GMT
At some stations the height difference between train floor and platform is so great that any sort of ramp would need to be dangerously steep. More than some stations. The prototype ramp didn't leave enough room inside the train to get a wheelchair on or off. The creation of wheelchair spaces on the trains may allow an angled ramp to be used. However, the lack of lifts at most of the stations makes it a fairly pointless exercise. On the same tangent, have TFL worked out how the wheelchair arrangements will apply at the curved platforms at Waterloo, because it looks like a nightmare waiting to happen. That being said, the arrangements at Bank when the 1992 stock get their wheelchair spaces will probably be even more torturous. |
|
