|
|
Post by undergroundernie on Jul 13, 2008 11:40:22 GMT
The 09ts has been given a recent modification it now features LUL roundels and has been numbered 11004.
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jul 13, 2008 16:07:04 GMT
I think you'll find that's the secned one that's in the process of being delivered
|
|
|
|
Post by undergroundernie on Jul 13, 2008 19:45:55 GMT
I was unsure whether it was the 09 that is currently at north park or if the second had been delivered yet, as a collegue forwarded me the images.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2008 20:40:11 GMT
I think you'll find that's the secned one that's in the process of being delivered Secned??? |
|
|
|
Post by ratfink on Jul 14, 2008 14:03:27 GMT
11004 is just the car number (A car for Train 2)
other train 2 a car is 11003
(A cars for train 1 are 11001 and 11002)
|
|
|
|
Post by 100andthirty on Jul 14, 2008 21:03:14 GMT
I think you'll find that's the secned one that's in the process of being delivered Secned??? "second" in gibberish! |
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Jul 19, 2008 15:40:32 GMT
Is there a good reason why the Victoria Line needs two prototype trains? I know the 35TS begat the successful 38TS and the 86TS begat the, ehem, less-than-successful 92TS, but two pre-production trains seems excessive. (I could understand the S Stock project doing this if they wanted to use different seating layouts and train lengths!) In general modern LU rolling stock has not appeared first in trial form. I'm assuming both 09TS 'shells' will eventually be rebuilt as standard trains or will they be junked as per the 86TS? (Or confined to the Mill Hill East shuttle? - Joke!) Is there much difference betweens 09TS trains 1 and 2?
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,350
|
Post by Colin on Jul 19, 2008 16:06:11 GMT
This is my understanding from what I've generally picked up on the project - if anyone knows better, feel free to make me look as though I'm talking rubbish! (now how often do you see an offer like that? ;D ;D).... Is there a good reason why the Victoria Line needs two prototype trains? Yes - train 1 is half full with testing equipment......train 2 is, AFAIK, more like a normal train, though modified for testing purposes. In general modern LU rolling stock has not appeared first in trial form. And look at the problems that have come with the 90's stocks; trip cocks failing to latch when operated, stress fractures and parts falling off, etc. Admittedly the 96ts on the Jubilee seems to have fared better than the 92ts/95ts on the Central/Northern lines. Surely though, it makes basic common sense to thoroughly test the product first before attempting to run a full service. LU would have a lot of egg on their faces if they introduced another new stock and had all the problems of the Central & Northern lines..... again. It's about time LU were noted for getting it right first time round in the publics eyes - and I hope all the testing pays off. There is also the point that testing is now a mandatory thing when introducing new stocks - I dunno if it applied to the 90's stocks......it certainly wouldn't have applied to anything prior to 1990 - so it's not just being done for the sake of it, but rather because it must be done. I'm assuming both 09TS 'shells' will eventually be rebuilt as standard trains or will they be junked as per the 86TS? Re-built. Is there much difference betweens 09TS trains 1 and 2? See above. |
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jul 19, 2008 16:08:13 GMT
You have to think more outside the envelope...certainly having prototypes was the norm in the aviation industry, though there have been notable exceptions. As regards the Undergound there have been numerous instances of trials/pre-production/prototype vehicles: 1935 Stock as mentioned, car 10306 the 1948ish -converted 'sunshine car', the two? cars that preceded the A60 Stock, the three 1956 Stock trains, the 1960 Stock, the two 1973 units (ETT), the 1986 Stock...However, in the case of the 1935 Stock, 1956 Stock and two ETT 1973 Stock units, these were converted or were able to run in service so being non-production does not mean that they do not have a future.
The same also applied now I recall with the pioneer Tyne & Wear Metrocars. It is surely correct to get new designs out in the field so that series production versions can benefit from any feedback? I would also add the PEP SR trains that begat the 507/8, 313, etc., the Class 42 HST cars...
|
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Jul 19, 2008 16:19:07 GMT
Still not consistent though as there have been no new-build prototype surface stock since the 1950s (how come they get it right first?)...though of course the A, C and D Stocks all had experimental refurbished units or cars in recent years.
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Jul 19, 2008 20:55:08 GMT
You can't really argue that the R59 Stock was in any way a precursor, agreed, and so you have to fall back on the 1962/3 ATO conversion I suppose and that's it! I cannot recall whether there was anything built in advance of the C69 Stock.
|
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jul 20, 2008 0:32:33 GMT
You can't really argue that the R59 Stock was in any way a precursor, agreed, and so you have to fall back on the 1962/3 ATO conversion I suppose and that's it! I cannot recall whether there was anything built in advance of the C69 Stock. The ATO conversion was neither a prototype or a precursor[1]; much experimentation was undertaken prior to the C stock build, but nothing was built that ran in passenger service. [1] well, it could be seen a a precursor in the classical sense; and then only of the chain that ended up with F A C T. |
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Jul 20, 2008 3:27:33 GMT
11004 is just the car number (A car for Train 2) other train 2 a car is 11003 (A cars for train 1 are 11001 and 11002) Weren't those also numbers for 1938 stock? |
|
Ben
fotopic... whats that?
Posts: 4,282 
|
Post by Ben on Jul 22, 2008 10:51:39 GMT
Prototype for the C stock? That'd be the 'hustle' train  |
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Aug 4, 2008 15:48:25 GMT
11004 is just the car number (A car for Train 2) other train 2 a car is 11003 (A cars for train 1 are 11001 and 11002) Weren't those also numbers for 1938 stock? They were numbers for 1935 prototype stock. 1938 DM numbers started at 10012 and 11012. |
|
