|
Post by jimbo on Mar 4, 2023 20:01:32 GMT
The first new Picc Line train should arrive next year. The line needs a larger fleet of longer trains to cope with demand which has grown over some 50 years. The line hadn't reached Heathrow when the first 1973TS arrived! But it just seems crazy to scrap trains which are more reliable than most of the LU fleet. The D train project showed what is possible with trains only a few years younger! The current S7 fleet is less reliable than the D stock fleet was, and they were technically similar to the Picc Line trains, and both with a long history of reliability.
In the latest statistics (Freedom of Information response on 29 December 2022 - reference FOI-2066-2223) the Picc fleet is only just beaten by the Victoria Line trains, some 35 years younger! The Picc trains travel four times as far as the Jubilee Line trains between failures! Surely it makes more sense to scrap the unreliable Jubilee Line trains, and replace them with similar Northern Line trains, with the shortage there being made up with the reliable Picc. Line trains of similar size. The Piccadilly Line trains travel 60% further between failures than the Northern Line trains, which travel 2½ times further than Jubilee Line trains do, so gains all round!
There are complications of course, in that the Jubilee Line uses 7-car trains and the Northern Line only 6-cars, so 86½ 6-car Piccadilly Line trains could replace 85 Northern Line trains, but of these 17 would be split to provide 68 converted special trailers and 34 scrap cab cars. The Jubilee Line would therefore receive 68 7-car trains to replace the current fleet and also provide 5 additional trains. The Northern Line would have 1½ additional trains, which may help with a mixed fleet. The 34 scrap Northern Line cab cars together with 63 scrap Jubilee Line trains could provide surplus equipment to equip 80 former Picc Line trains for cab video for platform monitors and TBTC equipment. That would leave 6½ Picc trains still to be equipped. This would leave the Northern Line with only 21 of its current trains. A further complication is that the current Northern Line fleet is leased on a fully maintained basis, and would need to be bought outright with maintenance brought in-house, as on all other fleets.
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Mar 4, 2023 21:51:10 GMT
I'm not sure where to start, but in no particular order:
1) Converting the 1973 tube stock to operate on the Northern line would require the Thales CBTC system and the track to train CCTV system. The former is a very big modification and the only spare space for the kit in on the trailer cars (identified when there was a plan to fit the Bombardier CBTC system well over 10 years ago to interrun with the sub-surface signalling upgrade). The Thales CBTC would have to be tuned for a far less flexible braking system which might affect stopping accuracy. Providing the equipment from redundant trains as outlined above is the easy bit, and, in any event some of it is part of the problem. 2) Higher performance is required on the Northern line. The 1973 tube stock was designed with higher performance capability which has never been used. But enabling it now would put huge strain on the traction system. 3) part of the reason for the underframe cracks on the 1996 tube stock is the additional longitudinal traction and braking forces arising from the addition of the 7th car. If 1995 tubes stock were to be converted to 7-car then they would suffer similarly. 4) it is impossible to compare reliability between lines, there are so many factors affecting it. The most extreme example being the Central and W&C - same train but very different reliability figures. One really does need to get behind the headline figures and understand what sub-systems or components are causing the failures and set about fixing them. There is also a lot more kit on the modern trains compared with the 1973 tube stock. 5) Major engineering modifications to old trains are almost always more expensive and take longer than anyone expects even after making ample allowance. D train has not been a rip roaring success, the class 769 conversion from class 319 has been extremely troublesome and 1992 tube stock engineering change has been going on for a very long time with no service date in sight.
Piccadilly line trains have become reliable because its management took the trouble to understand why it was failing and put in place the actions - in terms of people, process and eauipment to address the root causes. These principles should be applied to the other fleets.
I've responded seriously but I realise, Jimbo, that your post might have been tongue in cheek!
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 5, 2023 9:04:11 GMT
I wonder whether those public reliability figures include the on-board ATC equipment - which 1973TS doesn't have of course. I'd forgotten the ambitious plan to have the now cancelled Bombardier ATC on the Piccadilly line as well as SSR lines. Now I recall fitting two ATC sets to a trailer car had to be considered, to allow for the Picc Rail Adhesion Train. I hate to think about the outcry if the NL/JL TBTC kit or equivalent had to be repackaged to fit underframe cases on trailer cars!
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Mar 6, 2023 13:58:47 GMT
I agree that it wil be a shame to see the loss of the 1973ts but am scratching my head as to what any second life could look like - beyond (perhaps) drinks cans.
Maybe a museum railway would take a few, make them work as either loco hauled or battery trains.
The only other possibility would be if the Bakerloo extension was built but the required new trains were unfunded.
It is a shame that their full potential performance was never enabled, it would be great if that situation was changed (providing that the power supply infrastructure could cope) as these trains do seem to dawdle too much. But this is a different issue.
|
|
|
Post by burkitt on Mar 6, 2023 14:34:14 GMT
I would agree with everything said in the two previous replies, and add some more thoughts, in no particular order... 1)As 100and thirty says, there are many more factors than the stock itself in the reliability of a fleet. The characteristics of the maintenance depots are key too - technical ability, motivation, industrial relations etc, and they would not follow the trains around if moved. 2)PR-wise, replacing 90s trains with 70s trains would be disastrous and is not going to happen 3)The 73TS are at a good place in the "bathtub curve" at the moment, but that won't last forever. Eventually they would need overhauls on the scale seen with the 72TS to address corrosion and fatigue, traction systems would start to fail, etc. 4)If the 73TS were being retained beyond the next couple of years, they'd need proper wheelchair bays installed 5)Given available depot capacity, after the first few 24TS deliveries, one 73TS needs to be removed from the Piccadilly for each 24TS that arrives. I do not believe TfL has the capacity to establish the two massive fleet overhaul programmes needed to convert 73TS for CBTC and lengthen the 95TS in the time available before 24TS come along - there literally isn't the space at Acton, let alone the number of engineers needed to design and manage this, or the money to pay for it.
|
|
|
Post by burkitt on Mar 6, 2023 17:32:44 GMT
6)Northern line drivers would rightly revolt and commence industrial action in response to being asked to transfer from 95TS to the far less safe and less ergonomic 73TS cabs.
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Mar 6, 2023 19:37:50 GMT
The only other possibility would be if the Bakerloo extension was built but the required new trains were unfunded. I think you would find some Bakerloo line curves where they won't fit.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 6, 2023 20:29:03 GMT
TBH barring possibly maybe one or two units being retained as engineers vehicles (i.e. maybe permanent RAT), and one car for Acton museum, I see and predict no future for them other than scrap. Unless some fire brigade somewhere wants a car or two for fire training. Or some nutter wants a big garden shed.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 6, 2023 21:07:59 GMT
Around 50 years service is not bad. First passenger service was July '75 I think. I also recall initial reliability was really poor. Big efforts over many years to get on top of that.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,165
|
Post by Tom on Mar 6, 2023 21:36:22 GMT
5)Given available depot capacity, after the first few 24TS deliveries, one 73TS needs to be removed from the Piccadilly for each 24TS that arrives. Is that taking into account the availability of stabling berths today or when the two depots are being taken to bits at the same time for upgrades?
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Mar 7, 2023 3:51:37 GMT
The only other possibility would be if the Bakerloo extension was built but the required new trains were unfunded. I think you would find some Bakerloo line curves where they won't fit. The similar sized 1983 tube stock was cleared to run to E&C when required, and did from time to time until one brushed the tunnel wall to or from London Road depot. I guess small adjustments could be made as they were on the Northern Line to relax restrictions on the current trains. However, the gaps at curved platforms would be more concerning. There was a plan to trial a moveable gap filler on LU before Covid arrived. Has that been abandoned now?
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 7, 2023 11:31:18 GMT
Gap filler trial seems to have been abandoned during covid pandemic. Baker St platform 2 gap mitigation is looking at other options juggling stopping positions. Not entirely sure the rationale for stopping the gap filler work right now. Safely ensuring it deploys and retracts at the right moment was always a bit tricky with limitations the project put on itself.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 7, 2023 12:20:55 GMT
It seems fashionable every time a fleet is destined for replacement, no matter how old or obselete, or metro or main line, there is a knee jerk "what can they do next" response.
Forget it. They won't be going anywhere. Except as I posted above in small numbers as engineers or preserved or to crank's back gardens.
As for citing Dstock as an example, aside from IOW 484s and the LU RAT and the ERU training cars and preserved, none of them has proved a sucess and the bulk at Long Marston are up for sale.
Remember D were only selected because they are aluminium built.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,414
|
Post by metman on Mar 7, 2023 14:51:05 GMT
Trying to stay on topic here, I note the 1973 stock run as 3 car units on their current RAT (rail adhesion train) duties but I wonder if there is a plan to form a 5 car train like the similar(ish) D stock on the Metropolitan to allow a bit more power into the train.
For those not well acquainted with the D stock train, it is a typical 3 car train but with two non driving motor cars added giving 4 out of 5 cars powered.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Mar 7, 2023 18:34:53 GMT
Original arrangement was to withdraw one train for the season for conversion and split it for east and west end rail cleaning. If required, a second train could be split to make them work with each as 6-car trains. This seems never to have happened. Even the use of one split train led to service cancellation due to stock shortage. When the new trains arrive it would be open to run the RATS in 6-car formation, one converted unit in each. They will be shorter than the new trains being introduced.
|
|
|
Post by zbang on Mar 7, 2023 18:35:54 GMT
6)Northern line drivers would rightly revolt and commence industrial action in response to being asked to transfer from 95TS to the far less safe and less ergonomic 73TS cabs. Please expand on "far less safe".
(I'm not sure that "less ergonomic" is a good basis for action, but I'm not a LU driver. I do know that in many places a driver is expected to operate a variety of locomotives with different controls.)
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 7, 2023 19:27:03 GMT
73TS RAT - I think future plan is to keep them as a pair of 3 car trains. They seem to work fine like that for their Piccadilly line task. I'm not convinced the D78 RATs really needed to be 5 cars with 4 being motors, but it does give a reserve of power. At the time, the under powered and under braked AIT conversion was fresh in the corporate mind.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Mar 7, 2023 19:50:33 GMT
73TS RAT - I think future plan is to keep them as a pair of 3 car trains. They seem to work fine like that for their Piccadilly line task. I'm not convinced the D78 RATs really needed to be 5 cars with 4 being motors, but it does give a reserve of power. At the time, the under powered and under braked AIT conversion was fresh in the corporate mind. Don't they need more oomph for more getoutofthewayness on a high intensity high frequency CBTC line when pathed between high performance passenger stock ? AIUI thats why the D RAT is 4 motor cars for total 5 cars - for the future all CBTC railway. I would expect any Picc RAT post new stock and resignalling will be same even if resignalling is years away and might be something different it will still want ooomph for the same reasons.
|
|
|
Post by burkitt on Mar 7, 2023 20:14:53 GMT
5)Given available depot capacity, after the first few 24TS deliveries, one 73TS needs to be removed from the Piccadilly for each 24TS that arrives. Is that taking into account the availability of stabling berths today or when the two depots are being taken to bits at the same time for upgrades? Both. Fewer depot roads are available with the rebuilds in progress, but either way I believe it's under twenty 24TS that can be delivered before removals of 73TS must commence.
|
|
|
Post by burkitt on Mar 7, 2023 20:25:22 GMT
6)Northern line drivers would rightly revolt and commence industrial action in response to being asked to transfer from 95TS to the far less safe and less ergonomic 73TS cabs. Please expand on "far less safe".
(I'm not sure that "less ergonomic" is a good basis for action, but I'm not a LU driver. I do know that in many places a driver is expected to operate a variety of locomotives with different controls.) Less safe - the 73TS cab does not meet modern crashworthiness standards as-built, let alone with fifty years of fatigue and corrosion. Less ergonomic - again, what was acceptable half a century ago is not today. 73TS cabs offer great driver visibility, but are very cramped compared with 95TS. Such a step backwards on a fleetwide scale would not be acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by t697 on Mar 8, 2023 7:31:16 GMT
Don't they need more oomph for more getoutofthewayness on a high intensity high frequency CBTC line when pathed between high performance passenger stock ? AIUI thats why the D RAT is 4 motor cars for total 5 cars - for the future all CBTC railway. I would expect any Picc RAT post new stock and resignalling will be same even if resignalling is years away and might be something different it will still want ooomph for the same reasons. Maybe, but the Piccadilly line is all 'all stations' passenger service. A train that doesn't have to have passenger dwell times at stations has to be really slow to cause significant delay to following trains. Last I heard, 73TS RATs were going to stay 3 car. Things can always change!
Maybe one of the unused weak field steps could be reinstated if a bit more speed was really needed. They'll already be quicker than today though, once the rest of 73TS are gone, the traction supply made 750V and they have the relevant mods to stand the voltage, like the D78 RAT and other conversions have had, to operate on the SSR 750V areas. Also with the LUL TBTC and CBTC schemes to date, run through speeds at non-stopping stations (which the RAT would be doing) are about 20mi/h not the 5mi/h at the starter for traditional LUL signalling. So that again mitigates the RAT being slower than 24TS on full new signalling.
All this assumes of course that adhesion management becomes so good that we don't need leaf-fall Temporary Speed Restrictions and special timetables that slow down the passenger service anyway.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Feb 23, 2024 19:30:58 GMT
It appears that the current plan is to retain 1973TS on the Piccadilly Line for RAT duties when the new fleet arrives. This could operate in 6-car formations to provide spare units. Is there any possibility that further 1973TS RAT conversions could replace the RATs on the Central Line? They are getting pretty old now! 1973TS did run through the Central Line, from Ruislip to Hainault for trials on the Woodford shuttle, as the Experimental Tube Train (ETT). So, it would fit despite its longer cars.
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,957
|
Post by towerman on Feb 23, 2024 22:12:34 GMT
ETTs only ran between Hainault & Woodford,were hauled between Ruislip & Hainault by a 72TS pilot unit(3203).
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Feb 24, 2024 18:55:04 GMT
Keep them convertible between passenger and RAT duties and then they can earn their keep (when not needed for RAT duties) as heritage trains carrying premium fare paying passengers!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,414
|
Post by metman on Feb 25, 2024 21:34:22 GMT
I assume it is too much hassle to retain them for passenger standards after withdrawal although it would be nice.
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on May 10, 2024 20:14:58 GMT
Wide ranging FoI reply link
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on May 10, 2024 22:10:21 GMT
The TRV is 1973TS and regularly works through the Central Line between Craven motor cars at normal speeds, perhaps not so regularly in recent times! So the long cars will fit, although the 1973 motor cars would require high-rise shoe-gear fitted together with signalling gear in order to replace the current RATs.
|
|
|
Post by joshua on Jul 21, 2024 14:12:05 GMT
I agree that it wil be a shame to see the loss of the 1973ts but am scratching my head as to what any second life could look like - beyond (perhaps) drinks cans. Would it be technically possible to use them on the Waterloo & City Line to replace the 482s, the 482s were then sent to the central line to operate the Woodford to Hainault shuttle to increase capacity on the Central Line and permit more trains to undergo the upgrade program faster? Aren't both Piccadilly Line and Waterloo & City Lines manually driven? Does the fact the Waterloo & City Line was once owned by British Rail until the 1990s affect the signalling layout compared to the Piccadilly Line? Apart from a small refurb like installing wheelchair spaces, new seat fabric, new diagrams and new announcements, are there any other modifications which would be needed?
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jul 21, 2024 14:29:09 GMT
I believe the W&City tunnels would be too tight for ‘73 Stock as they are much longer cars than 1992 Stock.
1973 Stock are only 3-car units, so would be a reduction from 1992 Stock 4-cars.
The 1992 Stock sent back to the Central would require ATO equipment to be fitted.
|
|
|
Post by d7666 on Jul 21, 2024 15:18:38 GMT
TBH barring possibly maybe one or two units being retained as engineers vehicles (i.e. maybe permanent RAT), and one car for Acton museum, I see and predict no future for them other than scrap. Unless some fire brigade somewhere wants a car or two for fire training. Or some nutter wants a big garden shed. I still hold this view.
|
|