Views on the A60/62 stock

Yup, built in 1960!

Yes, I've seen that too. The order was placed in 1959 I think and 5000-5001 must have been the prototype of sorts!

Our friend 5234-5 was actually the first train to be properly refurbished in 1992, coming out of retirement! Can I ask where you found out that 5000-1 and 5234-5 would be the last train and that they would be running in 2013 (not that I'm complaining about that!).

I love the A stock-I've grown up with them. They are warm, comfy and big! They are perfect for the route they are on. They are a little old, but as I was always taught, one must respect ones elders! On a more historical note they are probably all thats left of the old Metropolitan railway. I know this sounds strange but since 1933 the Met has been gradually absorbed into the LU collective- but has always been a little different. Big trains, fast services, special seat layouts, the coat of arms on the trains(!)...When the new trains arrive, the Metropolitan Line will simply be just another tube line!

It's a shame really that the new trains couldn't be more like the A stock with (mostly) 2+2 seating. I saw this article the other day-bought a tear to my eye!
blogs.guardian.co.uk/art/2007/10/classics_of_everyday_design_no_33.html

They won't keep any A stock for the Chesham service unfortunately although it would be great if they did-it would be like the heritage routes in London with Routemasters still being used!

Yeah, the A stock used to go really quick especially downhill from Amersham-mind you the Met-Vik locos and T stock trains could get to 65mph too!

I always thought that the Uxbridge branch was more like a tube line; and the lines to Watford/Chesham/Amersham was the "main line" portion of the Met for the following reasons:
1) The Uxbridge line is shared with the Piccadilly Line; with the other part of the Met shared with Network Rail.
2) After the Met became part of London Transport, ex-Metropolitan Railway stock (to include steam) worked the services to Watford/Amersham/Chesham; while new P stock (eventually supplemented by ex District Line F stock) worked the Uxbridge services.
3) Even though the branch to Watford opened 21 years after the Uxbridge, service to Watford was worked jointly with the LNER. There was no joint service to Uxbridge with any mainline company.
4) The majority of Uxbridge services nowadays run to the City along tracks shared by the Hammersmith and Circle lines. The other Met main branches have a preponderance of services to the 'main-line' like terminus of Baker Street.

The Uxbridge service is certainly more populated! Before the P stock arrived the Uxbridge was worked by a mix of Saloon (V) Stock and Ashbury (N/M) stocks. Of course VT stock used T stock motors pulling saloon stock trailers! Strangely when the F and O/P stocks were scrapped/displaced by A62 stock on the Uxbridge service the seating provision actually increased!

I love the stations on the joint line-except Moor Park and Northwood. My favourate station is probably Chorleywood-and I used to go everywhere as a kid too!

Hell yeah! They are the most amazing underground trains ever built! I will miss them hugely-especially considering what their replacements look like!

That was the plan for cross rail! I don't think many Amersham branch users would want just the Chiltern services-especially the cost!

They are old, but the design is excellent and something similar is needed.

In about 5 years yeah, it shouldn't effect the Chiltern trains. Some of the high ups live in that part of the world too! Chiltern is the best TOC however, so they must be doing something right!

Should Epping or Upminster loose its service-they're not in London?

South London is a nightmare! The first railways lines were built there and it tends to be a little more overcrowded than the north. Also the ground is poor for digging tunnels in.

I agree however that South London needs a proper metro service tho-it is very poor, they must rationalise the existing routes to improve things.

Quite abe, if you live up here-you understand!

To be fair, I don't know what all the fuss is about! One train uses ATO (in the week only probably) and the other is driven! Big Deal! Overground and the District share tracks at Gunnersbury-Richmond and Bakerloo and Overground share tracks at Queens Pk-Harrow & Wealdstone (for now)!

I think passengers are bothered. Why should they have to change? Harrow is not an 'easy' interchange especially as not all Marylebone trains stop there.

Chiltern decided they wanted fewer trains to stop at Met stations. For example-many do not stop at Rickmansworth during the rush hours and some do not stop at Chorleywood either. There is the odd train the that runs fast to/from Gt Missenden.

I don't think it will be that difficult to operate moving block signalling/ATO/ATP with Network Rail's AWS/ATP. Yes LU does need less complication-but not at the expense of train services!

Utimately, the Met was there first!

Ha ha ha! Yup it does have that look about it! I found some stats on it the other day. By getting a couple of tape measures out I worked out that if 2+2 seating was included in between the bays of double doors an 80cm gangway could be used! It does upset me that it won't happen!

The mixed seating looks really silly-I bet there is nowhere else in the world with it! I'd keep the A stock if I could!

Not if ATO is going to be delayed/canned! I doubt LU will go north of Amersham, nobody will pay for the substations etc to be installed! Look at the problems getting money for this Croxley Link!

Now-what worries me is that if ATO is delayed by many many years the capacity increase promised is NOT going to happen, leaving Met line customers in a very real disadvantage-espcially with a 30(odd)% loss of seats!

10tph to Uxbridge wouldn't happen and more worryingly, the T cup service proposed could really dig up some operational headaches in the Edgware Rd area without ATO!

Maybe you got a good unit! I never knew what the banging was? The ride is far better now track replacement is well underway. Considering the age of the stock they perform very well-and they don't have the worst reliability either!! Damn kids playing with the doors no doubt!