Seats

It strikes me that the seats on 92ts were an 11th hour afterthought - quite astounding really when you consider that the longest possible journey on one train is on the Central line

Try the T/Ops seat; much more comfortable! ;D

But yes... the seats are a bit on the uncomfortable side...

Given that the 92ts was a quick build option... New signalling, new track [in places] so why not new trains?

I agree that 92 stock seats aren't very comfortable - but if the mock-up is anything to go by, the 09 stock will be far worse!

I do... quite often in fact! ;D

I've not done the whole trip in one go... but three stops short... Late at night at night after meeting with friends NW of London it's easier to get a lift to the West end of the central for a simple journey home than faff around trying to make last connections in town...

Some of the cars on the Yamanote Line in Tokyo are 100% standing in the rush hour. So no worries about uncomfortable seats!

The 92TS manufacturer was BREL, later Adtranz, later Bombardier. They were built at Derby. They were chosen because they were the lowest price. They weren't an afterthought since the 1986 prototype trains were their predecessors.

All that said, with the lowest price, you get what you pay for. The windows leak and the body seals are always giving trouble. We know what happened to the motors (Chancery Lane). The trains are ugly but they do the job. Good acceleration and braking and wide doors with lots of standing room. Bombardier seem to have got the maintenace under control so they are a lot more reliable than they were at an average of 16,000kms between failures, second behind D Stock. Not bad when you consider they are a lot more complicated than D Stock.

Oh, it's popular belief that the lack of trailers contribute to the heat - the way the cars are designed doesn't seem that dissimilar to a 95/96, at least from a ventilation point of view. On another note, has anyone noticed how much the 92 stock cars sway when going fast? It seems more noticable on these as opposed to other stocks.

The 92s were the first modern tube stocks fitted with air suspension, not sure if the 95/96s have it, this probably gives more bounce.

Yes on individual cars. If it can't be reset the train has to be driven at reduced speed.

What would happen if all the cars' suspension broke?

Back to the seats, how about we abandon padded seats and go to plastic benches BUT we rent out pillows (1 pound per rent, unlimited, 75p returned upon return. Rent from big yellow machines) to cushion one's posterior.

Pillow fight!

Surely its disingenious to compare the plastic seats of a lot of other metro services today with the underground without taking into account that londoners pay (a lot) more for their services, and the underground has historically provided good comfort on its (and its predecesors) trains. Something about making a rod for ones own back...