|
|
Post by A60stock on Feb 14, 2023 17:09:24 GMT
I recall reading that in one of the original plans for the jubilee line before the extension opened was to refurbish the 83 stock with double doors and run them in service alongside the then new 96 stock. Ofcourse this never happened and the 96 stock alone was sufficient.
What would have happened if that plan to run both in service had been given the green light? Would you have been able to re-signal the line to ATO like it is today? Even if you could, would the 83 stock performance be able to match that of the 96 stock?
More interestingly, the 83 stock would today be around 40 years old and replacement probably due, however, the 96 stock would not be anywhere near its life expiry. How would tfl have gone about stock replacement? I would imagine either the 96 stock would have been retired early or the 83 stock would have to solider on for another 10 years or so.
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 14, 2023 18:00:05 GMT
The plan was to take each 3-car set of 1983 tube stock - there were 62 of them from memory - and carry out the modifications A60stock mentions. This would have been double doors, new propulsion equipment/motors, new bogies, new train control, and an interior refurbishment. Into each 3-car set would have been inserted 3 new cars. In practice this meant that only a heavily modified carbody would have been kept. It must have seemed like a good idea at the time!
The tenderers were given the option of proposing alternative solutions and, in the end, the cost of all new trains was very little more than the cost of the refurbishment, with much less risk.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Feb 14, 2023 20:59:44 GMT
Rechecking the Particular Specification for the JLE rolling stock I see it is specifically for all new cars, at least at the issue A4 of October '93. Was there a pre-tender period when prospective tenderers were invited to put forward their proposals for all new vs. part reworked 83TS? I do seem to recall there would have been difficulty with tenderers taking on risks associated with the 83TS cars.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Feb 14, 2023 21:27:17 GMT
The other plan which was also considered was to convert the 1983 stock to operate on the Piccadilly Line.
The plan was also to convert the large single leaf doors to double doors. Quite a few trailers from the first batch along with second batch were kept after withdrawal.
I don’t know the exact plans with the all the spare cars. Perhaps the middle motors would have been converted to uncoupling non driving motors but using the trailer ends, or they were only retained for their spare doors?
|
|
DWS
every second count's
Posts: 2,487
|
Post by DWS on Feb 14, 2023 21:35:12 GMT
The other plan which was also considered was to convert the 1983 stock to operate on the Piccadilly Line. DWS said The 1983 trains went to sidings at South Harrow and Cockfosters depot, they were left to rot and in the end could not be moved by rail, I recall the ones at South Harrow had to be lifted out by crane and taken away by road on lorries. |
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Feb 15, 2023 0:08:46 GMT
From memory, wasn't the Jubilee Line extension was supposed to have ATO from the start? But I seem to recall there were problems and colour signals were installed during the run up to opening. I assume this means there must have been a plan to run the 1983 'upgrades' with that original ATO system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Feb 15, 2023 5:13:08 GMT
From memory, wasn't the Jubilee Line extension was supposed to have ATO from the start? But I seem to recall there were problems and colour signals were installed during the run up to opening. I assume this means there must have been a plan to run the 1983 'upgrades' with that original ATO system. It was a short term fix to get the extension open following problems with the ATO system. Nothing to do with 1983 stock. |
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 15, 2023 7:21:26 GMT
Rechecking the Particular Specification for the JLE rolling stock I see it is specifically for all new cars, at least at the issue A4 of October '93. Was there a pre-tender period when prospective tenderers were invited to put forward their proposals for all new vs. part reworked 83TS? I do seem to recall there would have been difficulty with tenderers taking on risks associated with the 83TS cars. I think you're probably right. It would make sense for this option to be discussed pre bid. |
|
|
|
Post by ijmad on Feb 15, 2023 9:19:22 GMT
From memory, wasn't the Jubilee Line extension was supposed to have ATO from the start? But I seem to recall there were problems and colour signals were installed during the run up to opening. I assume this means there must have been a plan to run the 1983 'upgrades' with that original ATO system. It was a short term fix to get the extension open following problems with the ATO system. Nothing to do with 1983 stock. Sorry if not clear. I was postulating the opposite. If originally, the plan was to have the 1983 stock and a more limited run of the 1996 stock running together on the extension, AND the extension was to be signalled with an ATO system, that implies there should have been a plan to upgrade the 1983 stock to be compatible with that ATO system. Unless the decision to install ATO was made some time after the decision to retire the 1983 stock. |
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Feb 15, 2023 9:35:43 GMT
We are wandering into the realms of an alternative universe. Based on all the posts upstram the 1983 tube stock idea was knocked on the head long before anyone thought of integrating any ATO onto it, let alone the Westinghouse solution that was chosen and failed to get fitted.
But.......all LU tube stock purchased after 1967 tube stock had a basic space allocation for ATO kit and whilst not trivial, adapting an exiting train for ATO is possible. 1996 Tube stock was adapred for a very different style of ATO compared with the Westinghouse design originally fitted...............Yes, as far as I recall, the Westinghouse ATO kit was fitted and used to control the Platform Edge Doors. I'm sure t697 will confirm.
|
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Aug 21, 2023 18:47:56 GMT
Only just noticed the above after 6 months! Yes, the Westinghouse ATO units were fitted and just provided the PED control and PEDs Closed proving to the train, along with the station ID to allow the CIS to make the right announcements. Track/Train communication was by so-called PAC loops at the stations. These functions were transferred to the Thales Seltrac TBTC when it was commissioned and some time later, the redundant train equipment removed.
|
|
