LONDON | DLR, Underground, Tramlink [Archive] - Page 4

Pansori

May 15th, 2010, 05:53 PM

I have a couple of questions about the tube and DLR.

1. There was a small discussion in Shanghai metro topic about platform doors. They are used in the Jubilee line in London. Do they add extra time for the train to stop/depart or open/close the doors? If so, wouldn't it be better not to use a glass wall with doors but something like safety fences near the platform edge? It would still improve safety without causing side effects. Why such an option was chosen in Jubilee line? Are there any clear benefits?

2. I have noticed that doors in some trains (e.g. District line) sometimes open very early or even before the train has come to a complete halt. While some other trains (e.g. Central line) usually open doors after a short time lag (let's say, 1-2 s.) after the train has come to a complete halt. That, of course, may look trivial but when looking at the big picture those seconds add up. Is there any technical reason why some trains/lines can open doors earlier than others?

3. In some stretches the DLR trains start to shake... can't remember the precise location but even on a completely straight path it just starts shaking to the sides like crazy. Why is that happening? DLR was built fairly recently and shaking is something one wouldn't expect from a new system. Even the oldest LU lines do not shake like that.

WatcherZero

May 15th, 2010, 11:58 PM

1. Theres two types, security fences like you say to stop people being pushed onto the line at crowded times or fully enclosed tunnels which remove the air pressure changes and can make cooling and ventilation easier.

2. Auto sensing doors or driver flipping a switch in the cabin to release them.

3. An issue with light rail at higher speeds, they sway quite badly on worn track.

iampuking

May 16th, 2010, 04:23 AM

1) PSDs do increase dwell times marginally as drivers can't open doors before the train stops. However, on the Jubilee line the drivers rarely open the doors before the train stops at non-PSD stations, so the PSDs don't really make a difference.

2) From what i've noticed, all lines apart from the Central and the Jubilee the drivers can open the doors before the train stops. I don't know the exact reason but i'm pretty sure it's specific to the rolling stock on those lines.

3) The shaky ride is due to the fact that DLR trains are made for tight curves, therefore on straight sections of track the train is technically out of it's comfort zone..

Pansori

May 16th, 2010, 05:15 AM

Thanks for the answers guys. I don't know why but I have that weird habit of observing the way doors are opening each time the trains stops. Once (I think it was District line Wimbledon branch) the driver used to open the doors so early that you could physically step out on the platform just before the train came to a complete halt. I was always guessing that in other stock (Jubilee, Central) it is prevented by some automatic safety systems. I kinda like the idea of opening the doors just before the train has stopped. Even if each such "early" opening saves at least 1 second of time it adds up to something more substantial in the end.

Tubeman

May 16th, 2010, 10:52 AM

iampuking

May 17th, 2010, 03:42 AM

MTF

May 17th, 2010, 09:39 PM

They were renovating Oxford circus station in 2009 any pictures?

Tubeman

May 17th, 2010, 09:53 PM

They were renovating Oxford circus station in 2009 any pictures?

It's barely noticeable... Just cosmetic really, looks a bit cleaner / brighter than before. Escalators 1-3 have just been taken out for a year, so the station's pretty chaotic right now (exit only in the am peak).

There's a good chance I'll be taking over the management of Oxford Circus come November, it's being added to my current 6 stations in a reorganisation and I guess I've got as good a chance as anyone of remaining in the hot seat.

MTF

May 17th, 2010, 10:41 PM

Will look forward to see some pics.:)
What is the news on Mile End station? Renovation completed?

iampuking

May 18th, 2010, 03:07 AM

So many stations are renovated, it's hard to keep track of them. Best thing to do is to look on Flickr for the most recent photos of the station.

PortoNuts

May 19th, 2010, 07:36 PM

weGfcEN0Lr4

PortoNuts

May 26th, 2010, 02:22 PM

4Ev4JxSEj3s

PortoNuts

May 28th, 2010, 08:34 PM

Wood Lane Station - Circle/ Hammersmith & City Lines

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/7015/29337987892f3931a525b1.jpg

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1420/29943768534e3fec229eb1.jpg

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4540/34926434822a296783fdb1.jpg

http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/7126/2933771279f220fb6ddcb1.jpg

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/8664/29337849815dec0e8122b1.jpg

http://img37.imageshack.us/img37/9352/293464063857e3613cd8b1.jpg

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/4584/2933768941b4937b86f6b1.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/2933798789/sizes/l/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jemmans/2994376853/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dmcl/3492643482/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/2933771279/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/2933784981/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/2934640638/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/2933768941/sizes/l/in/photostream/

iampuking

May 30th, 2010, 06:10 AM

Interesting video that shows how much Bank station has changed over 20 years.

GtGl9VaKRKI

Tubeman

May 30th, 2010, 09:56 AM

Very interesting... It certainly was very shabby before the refurb... I think people who love slagging the Tube off should remind themselves of how unpleasant a lot of it was until the 1990's.

At 3m25s there's good footage of the Guard at work; my first job with LU

I was Guard and driver on the ex-Central Line 1962 stock trains featured here; many were displaced to the Northern Line when the 1992 Stock was introduced.

Davodavo

May 30th, 2010, 12:53 PM

Can the collection date and place of an Oyster card be changed?
I am trying to do so contacting with TFL but they do not answer.
Otherwise, if you have not collected the card by now, do they give your money back? How?

CairnsTony

May 30th, 2010, 02:18 PM

I often travelled a route from my home near Clapham North tube station to my sisters near Newbury Park in the 1980s, going via Bank. Remembering what it was like then and seeing in this video what it's like now makes for fascinating viewing.

PortoNuts

May 30th, 2010, 05:43 PM

The station is much better now. :cheers: People really ignore how much improvement has been done in older stations, trying to keep updated century old stations. And the LU works within a network of other urban railways and the connections have definitely improved. :cheers:

Interesting video that shows how much Bank station has changed over 20 years.

GtGl9VaKRKI

PortoNuts

May 31st, 2010, 05:29 PM

Redbridge Station - Central Line

http://i50.tinypic.com/2yozwnp.jpg

http://i50.tinypic.com/35nafl0.jpg

http://i45.tinypic.com/25qahcm.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/photocapy/26940769/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shehbazbadesha/2206534293/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/shehbazbadesha/2206532483/sizes/l/

PortoNuts

June 1st, 2010, 04:57 PM

A video about the DLR preparations for the London Olympics (it's from March, but still).

S764Djwt3IY

originally posted by Jamandell.

PortoNuts

June 8th, 2010, 05:22 PM

Wood Green Station - Piccadilly Line

http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/8027/457054311330806493bbb1.jpg

http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/2/4570519985e0911c8c91b1.jpg

http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/4655/457088328576eaec9093b1.jpg

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7559/45708770813720475193b1.jpg

http://img44.imageshack.us/img44/8138/4571487740b30e4312f8b1.jpg

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/2661/4570796143d24c1b4307b1.jpg

http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/2948/4571422944df309a53e0b1.jpg

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/5938/457132662490f967698fb1.jpg

http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/4995/457062038770c24c48ffb1.jpg

http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/2599/45712332748a2ffb3c67b1.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4570543113/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4570519985/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4570883285/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4570877081/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4571487740/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4570796143/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4571422944/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4571326624/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4570620387/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4571233274/sizes/l/

Harrow + London

June 10th, 2010, 02:13 PM

Tubeman

June 10th, 2010, 08:24 PM

The Hammersmith & City line no longer has any of its own stations since the Circle line extension. Therefore, wouldn't it be sensible to remove the line completely? That would be 1 less line that tfl (or whoever runs the line) has to pay for - it could use the saved money to fund track replacement, new rolling stock, station refurbishments and possible extensions. Admittedly, the District line would likely face extra pressure from Barking to Aldgate East, but there is a solution. Once the new S-class trains arrive on the Metropolitan line, it could branch off from Liverpool Street station and travel along the old H&C route to Aldgate East and continue to Barking (with a possible extension to Dagenham Dock). Currently, the Met line is one of the least used lines on the network, and has room to spare for extra passengers from East London.

At the moment, at off-peak hours, fast trains from Amersham and slow Watford trains terminate at Baker Street, with the slow Uxbridge trains terminating at Aldgate. With the Metropolitan line extension, fast Amersham trains would continue to travel to Baker Street, and Uxbridge trains would continue on to Aldgate. Watford services however would travel to Barking. Not so sure about peak hour services, which are currently very confusing. Anyway, feedback?

(I'm new by the way - I've been reading posts to check on projects for years but I never actually thought to register and contribute)

Welcome :)

There's no saving to be made other than on pink ink. The Hammersmith & City and Circle Lines are operationally the same thing: same trains, same drivers, same depots. They're no different to one another in reality than two District line services like Ealing - Tower Hill and Richmond - Upminster. They were just separated for historical reasons and it's stuck, I do agree that the distinction is pointless now.

I've described this elsewhere, but I'd run an amalgamated service of Hammersmith to Barking via a lap of the Circle and back again, i.e.:

Hammersmith - Edgware Rd - Liverpool St - Tower Hill - Gloucester Rd - Edgware Rd - Liverpool St - Aldgate East - Barking

(and back again)

This is lovely in principle because it covers both lines completely, is simple, removes the current inconvenience of getting chucked off a terminating 'Circle' at Edgware Rd and changing platforms to continue, but the issue is tph.

The southern edge of the Circle can't have too many tph without adversely affecting the District, I guess 8 or 9 tph tops before you denude the District service too much, but as this frequency then doubles up between Edgware Rd and Liverpool St, it reduces the possible tph on the Metropolitan Line too. Finally, as this new service is now the only service from Edgware Rd to Hammersmith, it would represent a service cut which would displease Westfield who paid for Wood Lane station.

My (not totally ideal) solution would be to run my above stated service pattern at 9 tph. Combined with the current 21 tph on the District Line between Earl's Court and Tower Hill, that's 30 tph between Gloucester Road and Tower Hill in total (easily doable with ATO). The doubled-up section Edgware Rd to Liverpool St would be 18 tph, allowing 12 tph on the Met Line between Baker St and Aldgate (the rest would terminate at Baker St) giving a total of 30 tph Baker St to Liverpool St. In order to boost the Hammersmith branch service and appease Westfield, I'd build a new bay reversing platform at Paddington Suburban to allow a Paddington - Hammersmith shuttle for the peak (although I personally think that 9 tph is adequate for this section).

lightrail

June 10th, 2010, 09:22 PM

Justme

June 10th, 2010, 11:46 PM

Welcome :)

There's no saving to be made other than on pink ink. The Hammersmith & City and Circle Lines are operationally the same thing: same trains, same drivers, same depots. They're no different to one another in reality than two District line services like Ealing - Tower Hill and Richmond - Upminster. They were just separated for historical reasons and it's stuck, I do agree that the distinction is pointless now.

I'm one of these odd people that think lines shouldn't have branches. If it splits, it should be a different line on the map. I know people say it would be terribly complicated on the tube map, but I'm sure some graphic designers could do a wonderful job.

It just makes it easier when planning journeys to know that if you get on say a district line in one direction, no matter what, it will end at a certain station. Not am I on district line that goes to a, or is it the one to b, or maybe this goes to c and so on.

I'm pretty sure most metro's around the world split their lines unless it is a really small branch.

Harrow + London

June 11th, 2010, 10:48 AM

Running the Met express trains beyond Baker Street into the City would not be a good use of the stock or train paths. The express stock was designed for less capacity (less doors, more seats), so probably could not handle the crowds on the inner circle anyway. Best to leave that to the high capacity stock used on the local Met, Circle and H and C.

Amersham trains are express trains. My idea was to have them terminate at Baker Street, for the reason you mentioned above - capacity.
Just wanted to confirm your viewpoint.

Comfortably Numb

June 11th, 2010, 01:47 PM

Redbridge Station - Central Line

http://i45.tinypic.com/25qahcm.jpg

I have never been to this station - it looks different from the regular-looking LU stations. Looks like it needs a lick of paint too!

Tubeman

June 11th, 2010, 07:00 PM

PortoNuts

June 11th, 2010, 07:30 PM

That station looks very Soviet just like Gants Hill, inspired by the Moscow Metro.

Harrow + London

June 11th, 2010, 09:14 PM

Really? Redbridge doesn't look as ornate or symmetrical as those metros. Looks more like a regular LU station to me. Still, everyone's opinion's different

PortoNuts

June 11th, 2010, 09:42 PM

Obvisouly it doesn't have the ostentious decoration of Moscow Metro but it resembles its layout. And it certainly doesn't look like a regular LU station.

Comfortably Numb

June 12th, 2010, 01:00 AM

^^
The Leytonstone - Newbury Park section of the Central Line is very shallow compared to most Tube lines, so the stations are cut & cover 'boxes' rather than the traditional stations which are bored Tubes of a wider diameter than the running tunnels. The line was built around about the same time as the roads and housing above, so this was feasible.

Hi Tubeman....I didn't know that about the Central Line. I can't say that Ive used the Central Line much though. It just caught my eye how unorthodox this particular station looked, in relation to the most common format of station on the London Underground. I have never rode the Metropolitan Line and I'd love to see some stations from that too. Sorry....I'm kind of fascinated by the London Underground!

iampuking

June 12th, 2010, 02:09 AM

^^ Redbridge station is cut-and-cover, whereas most tube stations are bored. What makes it unusual is that it's a cut-and-cover station on a 'tube' line, and that unlike most of the cut-and-cover stations it is an island platform. Other stations like this are on the end of the Piccadilly line's Heathrow branch (Hounslow West, Hatton Cross, all Heathrow stations) and on the 21st century section of the Jubilee line (Canada Water, Canary Wharf, North Greenwich). I think Gants Hill, next stop down the line from Redbridge, is cut-and-cover too, but the platform tunnels look bored.

Tubeman

June 12th, 2010, 10:12 AM

Hi Tubeman....I didn't know that about the Central Line. I can't say that Ive used the Central Line much though. It just caught my eye how unorthodox this particular station looked, in relation to the most common format of station on the London Underground. I have never rode the Metropolitan Line and I'd love to see some stations from that too. Sorry....I'm kind of fascinated by the London Underground!

Only a very short section, the vast bulk of the tunnelled sections of the Central Line are like the other deep-level tubes.

In fact, I'm a little surprised that the Leytonstone - Newbury Park section wasn't cut & cover full stop... The streets above are Interwar, I don't know when the A12 Eastern Avenue above was laid out, but I'm guessing early 1930's, and the railway below was already largely structurally complete when the war broke out in 1939 (the tunnels were used as an aircraft parts factory). It just seems very short-sighted to be boring a Tube line under a road less than a decade old.

iampuking

June 12th, 2010, 11:26 PM

Brilliant video of the new 2009 Stock in service on the Victoria line from Oxford Circus to Stockwell.

k-0NuXzqv6k

PortoNuts

June 13th, 2010, 11:59 PM

^^It seems that LU has been investing a lot more in new rolling stock than back then. Wasn't some early 1970's rolling stock still in use in this past decade?

Tubeman

June 14th, 2010, 12:14 AM

^^It seems that LU has been investing a lot more in new rolling stock than back then. Wasn't some early 1970's rolling stock still in use in this past decade?

Early 1960's rolling stock is alive and well and running on the Metropolitan Line!

There's still plenty of old stock around, although it's all been refurbished so certainly doesn't look its age:

Metropolitan - 1960
Victoria - 1967
Circle / Hammermith & City - 1969 (& 1977... 2 batches)
Bakerloo - 1972
Piccadilly - 1973

Apoc89

June 14th, 2010, 12:27 AM

Well all the '60s stock is being replaced as we speak and should be gone in a few years, which would leave the Bakerloo's 1972 trains as the oldest.

Speaking of which, a video of the new S stock running on open track in a test run:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlqWP1xuXCw

I also just noticed that it doesn't have the last two digits of its year of introduction in its name like older subsurface trains. Wouldn't that make it the S10 stock?

iampuking

June 14th, 2010, 01:59 AM

^^The distinction is usually made between the legnth of the trains, for instance S7 or S8. I'd imagine there is no need for a distinction between the age of the individual S Stock trains because they're all coming in one batch.

Davodavo

June 14th, 2010, 07:00 PM

Definitely good news that TFL is investing as much in stock as it is doing in stations.

I really like these new trains, do you know when will they be introduced in the Piccadilly Line?

Tubeman

June 14th, 2010, 09:27 PM

Definitely good news that TFL is investing as much in stock as it is doing in stations.

I really like these new trains, do you know when will they be introduced in the Piccadilly Line?

The Piccadilly upgrade is due to follow when the Northern upgrade is complete in 2012, new trains will go hand in hand with new signalling. That being said, with finances being what they are, it's difficult to predict when the upgrade will actually happen.

streetquark

June 14th, 2010, 11:41 PM

Really? Redbridge doesn't look as ornate or symmetrical as those metros. Looks more like a regular LU station to me. Still, everyone's opinion's different

The overall design of the space is what is most Moscow-like, especially the large central corridor and wide columns. AFAIK LT took a tour of Moscow as one of their fact finding missions - as they did to NY and Paris - and this was the result.

coth

June 15th, 2010, 11:43 AM

Looking on some other shots it seems there is no central hall. There is just a single row of columns at the center of station.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Redbridge_station_eastbound_look_west.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Redbridge_station_westbound_look_east.JPG

And I don't remember any stations in Moscow with "wide columns". As long as you didn't mixed up "wide columns" with pylons.

Minato ku

June 15th, 2010, 02:22 PM

^^ It remind me more Berlin subway than Moscow metro.

dars-dm

June 15th, 2010, 04:04 PM

And I don't remember any stations in Moscow with "wide columns". As long as you didn't mixed up "wide columns" with pylons.

I think he meant column-wall type station. Thus Redbridge is a shallow column-wall station
Maybe, it will be good to sort the LU stations on the construction types (like Moscow): column st., column-wall, two- or three-vaulted?

Tubeman

June 15th, 2010, 07:58 PM

^^
People are getting Redbridge and Gants Hill mixed up; it's Gants Hill which is Moscow metro inspired

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Gants_Hill_Underground.jpg

future.architect

June 16th, 2010, 07:19 PM

I hope this doesnt go ahead :ohno:

Tories want London Underground trains to be driverless

All trains on the London Underground should be driverless, according to the Conservative group on the London Assembly.

In a proposal to the mayor, the Tories claim it would save about £141m-a-year in wages and prevent strike action.

Transport for London (TfL) said staff on board trains reassure passengers, provide information and help with speedy alighting.

The Rail, Maritime and Transport union said the proposal would hit safety.

In a memo, seen by BBC London, to the London Mayor Boris Johnson, the London Assembly Conservatives say: "Driverless trains offer a safer, faster, more efficient level of service," the memo states.

"Such a system would end the strangle-hold militant unions have on the city's tube network and seriously curtail their ability to bring London to a standstill.

"The Victoria and Central lines already use technology which has reduced train drivers to door openers.

Continue reading the main story
The Victoria and Central lines already use technology which has reduced train drivers to door openers
Memo to the mayor

Do we even need drivers?
"Current upgrade work will extend this to the Jubilee, Northern, Piccadilly, District, Circle, Hammersmith and City and Metropolitan Lines.

"With the recent decision to bring [maintenance company] Tube Lines under the control of Transport for London, this is the time to switch to a completely driverless train network."

It adds that a driverless network would solve the "poor state of industrial relations between London Underground management and train operators."

It said between 31 December 2005 and 23 December 2009, there were 20 days of strikes and between the 21 April 2005 and 23 December 2009, there were 34 strike ballots involving the RMT and other unions.

But Bob Crow, general Secretary of the Rail, Maritime and Transport union - the biggest union on the Underground - said: "It is badly thought out, safety has not been thought out.

Continue reading the main story
We are taking it very seriously and it will be resisted
RMT's Bob Crow
"What will happen in a terrorist attack, a derailment or a massive signal failure, is you could have 600 or 700 people trapped down the Tube with no driver - there would be utmost panic.

"I don't think the travelling public will put up with that.

"Under normal circumstances I would be tempted to dismiss this leaked report as some kind of a joke, cooked up by anti-union fantasists, but in the current climate of cuts and attacks on public services we are taking it very seriously and it will be resisted.

"It may well be that some junior politician is simply flying a kite to make a name for themselves, but RMT will not sit back and allow this lethal and unworkable idea to gain any traction whatsoever."

A TfL spokesman said: "The Victoria and Central line trains are the only ones currently in operation on the Tube network that are automatically operated, however on these lines a train operator is in the cab.

"Having a member of London Underground staff on a train helps give reassurance to passengers, ensures prompt opening and closing of doors, speedy boarding and alighting of passengers and departure of the train."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/10332333.stm

NCT

June 16th, 2010, 11:22 PM

The more I read that article the more it sounds like the Tories are idealogically anti-workers rather than just wanting to save on costs.

iampuking

June 17th, 2010, 05:23 AM

I think he meant column-wall type station. Thus Redbridge is a shallow column-wall station
Maybe, it will be good to sort the LU stations on the construction types (like Moscow): column st., column-wall, two- or three-vaulted?

It's hard to categorise LU stations as there are usually several central halls rather than one for each set of platforms. And then the oldest deep level stations have no central halls whatsoever. Sub-surface stations are complex and inconsistent too, it'd be hard to categorise Tower Hill or Baker Street for example.

Pansori

June 17th, 2010, 05:37 AM

deasine

June 17th, 2010, 06:54 AM

Well automation brings definitely a lot of benefits. Train automation allows very frequent headways, if needed. Depending on the signaling system used, trains can be operated at a designed headway of every 90 seconds and can stop within meters of the train ahead. But there should be an operator who can take charge if anything happens to a train is definitely. There are many other benefits, and capital cost is one of them, but I wouldn't use it as a big selling point, especially when it comes to the media. And while you can technically remove operators on trains, there has to be staff to be able to run the trains if anything happens.

As for Singapore, the Circle line and North East Line are fully automated without operators from what I know. I believe the MTR in Hong Kong is also part-way automated in some form or another, aside from the Disneyland Resort Line, which is fully automated.

coth

June 17th, 2010, 11:27 AM

Apoc89

June 17th, 2010, 04:04 PM

Yeah, I'm all for automatic operation but only if there's a human there to take charge at any moment, like on the DLR(and as the article mentioned, the LU's own Central/Victoria lines).

iampuking

June 18th, 2010, 02:37 AM

deasine

June 18th, 2010, 03:19 AM

For large and busy systems it brings more disadvantages than benefits. How do you suppose to close doors in peak hours and who will operate the situation during incidents?

edit: didn't read further of first sentence.
90 seconds can be reached without the bot.
and that's i was talking about. so, you still have to pay for staff. you have one driver per train, so nothing will change.

Just out of curiosity, which manual systems in the world have trains arriving at a sustained frequency every 90 seconds. It is also possible to run trains at a higher frequency of every 60 seconds. Those that are these are predominantly semi-automated in some form of another or have a much newer track signaling system.

I disagree with the fact that the Tories are doing this to diminish union power because that's not what automation should be for.

It's ridiculous to compare LU lines to new systems like Singapore. LU for instance, has small narrow tunnels where there is no emergency walkway. If there is an emergency, the passengers most likely won't know what to do, and if they do work out that they have to walk down the train to the end and then walk along the tracks how will they know if the traction current is on or off? What about in a situation like the bombings? LU also has very cramped an overcrowded stations without PEDs meaning passengers are sometimes only inches away from trains arriving and departing, there needs to be an operator to brake if someone has fallen, there was a death on DLR recently because of this. There are numerous more reasons...

Just out of curiosity, what are the safety features found at DLR stations and how does the emergency brakes on trains respond if there is something on the track?

coth

June 18th, 2010, 10:34 AM

Moscow Metro (bots/autopilot were removed in 1970's), Kiev Metro - sustained frequency every 90 seconds on over 99,98%. Shorter frequencies is hardly possible with 160m long trains. And nothing will help. Because it all comes to stupid passengers who thinks it is the last train and rushing into it by holding doors.

Acemcbuller

June 18th, 2010, 02:23 PM

I disagree with the fact that the Tories are doing this to diminish union power because that's not what automation should be for.

I'm Not taking a view either way but since when did sensible motivations uncoloured by dogma matter to politicans?
I haven't seen anything that shows they have even considered how much it would cost and how long it would take to achieve.

lightrail

June 18th, 2010, 08:02 PM

"It may well be that some junior politician is simply flying a kite to make a name for themselves, but RMT will not sit back and allow this lethal and unworkable idea to gain any traction whatsoever."

That reminds me of this (from Wikipedia about liddites):

"British textile artisans in the nineteenth century who protested – often by destroying mechanized looms – against the changes produced by the Industrial Revolution, which they felt was leaving them without work and changing their way of life."

Back to the old good days? :D

Is there really no way of making LU trains driverless? How does it work in, say, Singapore? Do they have train operators onboard as well?

Vancouver skytrain is fully automated. We have three lines. Two are linear induction powered and the third is standard third-rail. All three use the same automatic train control system. This is a moving block system and allowed headways of 45 seconds - though in service the normal headway is 108 seconds.

The trains on the oldest line have been running for 25 years and there has never been a accident caused by the automated system. There was a minor derailment last month caused by something falling off a train and affecting the following train - no injuries.

Trains are controlled by computer from a central location. Trains can be added or short-turned by the press of button to deal with spikes in crowds, or to recover from a delay.

Advantages: no dwell time required, trains can depart within seconds of arriving at a terminus, easy to add trains, no need to find drivers to increase service at short notice, trains can run all night if needed (we run a couple of trains all night when we have heavy snow or ice to keep the guideways clear for the next morning), service is consistent with all trains accelerating and decelerating exactly the same.

There are no train captains or staff on the trains. Staff at stations and roving inspectors and transit police.

Never been an issue of safety - trains run in tunnels and on elevated guideways - nobody feels unsafe because there isn't a driver on board.

Track intrusion systems are in place - pressure or infrared, and if these detect something, it shuts that section down and stops the trains. We've had idiots walking on the guideways, but the system stopped the trains and allowed the police to arrest the idiot - so nobody got killed. Same if somebody jumps on the track in front of a train - the system will shut down and stop the trains so reduces suicide attempts, though still possible if you jump close enough to the train.

There is a line clear system in place with the first train carrying an attendant who is able to stop the train if there is something on the guideway that got missed overnight. And the trains can be driven manually if needed.

It is the way London Underground should go - the Tories are right.

Because we started with automated trains, we don't have to fight unions on loss of drivers.

deasine

June 18th, 2010, 08:34 PM

Track intrusion systems are in place - pressure or infrared, and if these detect something, it shuts that section down and stops the trains. We've had idiots walking on the guideways, but the system stopped the trains and allowed the police to arrest the idiot - so nobody got killed. Same if somebody jumps on the track in front of a train - the system will shut down and stop the trains so reduces suicide attempts, though still possible if you jump close enough to the train.

That's the thing here: if iampuking said there was an incident on the DLR with regards to people falling on the track, are there any safety features and track intrusion systems? I should ask Tubeman in the other thread.

Being from Vancouver as well, I understand how automation works. But as iampuking said, if there aren't emergency walkways in tunnels where a line is automated, where a train cannot be exited safely or accessed easily during an emergency, it could be a potential problem.

Going back on lightrail's point however, when a system is automated, trains can be driven manually from the operations centre.

Tubeman

June 19th, 2010, 10:07 AM

It's ridiculous to compare LU lines to new systems like Singapore. LU for instance, has small narrow tunnels where there is no emergency walkway. If there is an emergency, the passengers most likely won't know what to do, and if they do work out that they have to walk down the train to the end and then walk along the tracks how will they know if the traction current is on or off? What about in a situation like the bombings? LU also has very cramped an overcrowded stations without PEDs meaning passengers are sometimes only inches away from trains arriving and departing, there needs to be an operator to brake if someone has fallen, there was a death on DLR recently because of this. There are numerous more reasons...

This is just a stupid Tory idea that is just to diminish union power, obviously made up by people that know nothing about the system. I'd imagine the cost of installing PEDs of some sort at every single station (as on the automated lines of the Paris Metro) would far outweigh the cost of a few strikes.

It's not as stupid an idea as you might think.

It is perfectly possible to have unstaffed trains on LU, and to do so safely.

You throw in a lot of 'what ifs', but if you look at it rationally, on an ATO line like the Victoria the 'driver' only performs a function better performed by a human for about 5 seconds in every 3 minutes. That is, the act of closing the doors. The other 2 minutes 55 seconds of departing, accelerating, braking, stopping, and doors opening don't realistically require any human input at all... Although the 'driver' does press buttons to open doors and start the train, this could be easily automated too. Is it really cost effective to have a human sat on every single one of our peak service of 425 trains on £42,000 p.a.?

I honestly believe that once ATO is universal on LU lines (maybe 20 years time), with some technological developments we can have unstaffed trains. I'd envisage a control centre with remote operators responsible for several trains at once (for argument's sake, 5). They would have CCTV views of platforms, in each car, and forward facing from the train front. Between stations, the forward view would be shown, then as a train approaches a platform, the view would switch to that platform for assurance that the track and platform edge are clear and remain on the platform as the train stops, doors open, and passengers alight and board. After a predetermined timetabled dwell time, the doors would automatically close and the train depart unless the remote operator over-rides (e.g. due to heavy loading), and perhaps there could be an alarm if any doors are obstructed to alert the remote operator to investigate why.

The remote operator would be able to make public address announcements in the trains under their control, either routine service update announcements to all, or an announcement into a specific car on a specific train to admonish kids dicking about or respond to a passenger alarm / passenger query.

So, emergencies... Well if someone purposefully jumps under a train at the last second, no amount of technology is going to stop that without PEDs. In the event that someone has accidentally fallen onto the track, this would be spotted by the remote operator and the train stopped in time (if this is possible), or there could be some form of infra-red detection system along platforms as described before. There are emergency stop plungers on ATO line platforms too, as a further safeguard.

Train breaks down between stations... On modern stocks the driver is pretty much useless. On older stocks which have air pipes with cocks and simple electric circuits with chunky fuses which blow and can be replaced, the driver is also a train technician and can rectify almost all train defects and get the train moving again. When a 92, 95 or 96 (and now 2009 or S) stock breaks down, it's generally fucked and the driver can do very little but wait for a train maintainer to appear and change a circuit board, so driver or not there's no difference really. All that a driver on a modern stock has is access to the on-board computerised train monitoring system which flags up what the defect is and where it is, this information could simply be transmitted to the remote operator instead. Indeed, the remote operator could basically go through all the checks a driver on board could go through remotely and even attempt to rectify remotely if possible... The days of a driver running up and down a defective train lifting up seats and cutting bits of equipment in and out will soon be over.

If a train does become irreparably defective between stations, on a modern stock all the driver does is make reassuring announcements and waits for assistance. The PAs can be made remotely by the remote operator. Everything that follows (usually the train behind being detrained and sent forward with a Train maintainer to assist, 'pushing out' if necessary), it doesn't really make any difference whether there is a driver on the stricken train or not.

Detraining between stations is always the absolute last resort, the train must literally be totally immobile (including being pushed or pulled by another train) before this is considered. For this reason I think emergency walkways are a little bit of a moot point: they should very very rarely be necessary. Whenever a train is detrained in the tunnel even now, nothing can happen until assisting staff from the station ahead have walked back to the train (drivers cannot perform this function alone) to count customers off the train and back on the platform, standing by hazards and obstacles, etc. On 7/7 no trains were detrained until station staff reached them, so what would be so different without a driver on board? As I said, the remote operator continues to make reassuring PAs, can pass instructions, interact with passengers via 2-way communications (like modern passenger alarms), and so forth.

In terms of cost-benefit I think there is a very strong argument for remote operation, and I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if it's been introduced on at least a couple of lines by the time I retire from LU.

deasine

June 19th, 2010, 11:03 AM

LU also has very cramped an overcrowded stations without PEDs meaning passengers are sometimes only inches away from trains arriving and departing, there needs to be an operator to brake if someone has fallen, there was a death on DLR recently because of this. There are numerous more reasons...

I'd imagine the cost of installing PEDs of some sort at every single station (as on the automated lines of the Paris Metro) would far outweigh the cost of a few strikes.

Just going back to this point, since Tubeman answered my question earlier, the DLR does not have any track intrusion systems installed at stations.

Lightrail briefly described how it worked earlier, but here's a picture I had to dig up from my albums.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs162.snc1/6049_256517965252_537325252_8290283_5123774_n.jpg

In Vancouver on the newer lines, looking towards the end of the platform, there are two main components of the platform intrusion system. Laser beams are installed on the trackbed and on the platform edge (as per photo at the end where there are boxes sticking out on a pole). As one crosses the laser beam on the platform edge, there will be an automatic warning message and a notification will be sent directly to the operations centre, which will have CCTV recording of the station. If someone or something falls in the track, crossing the platform lasers, an alarm rings and station attendants are generally dispatched to the station to check on things and give the clear ahead signal to run the trains back. On the occasion that someone does fall onto the trackbed as the train is entering the station, emergency brakes on-board trains are immediately activated and trains can make a full stop within two seconds, depending on the speed as it approaches the platform. Notice though, if there is something on the trackbed but doesn't cross the platform laser component, such as birds for instance, trains won't stop but the operations centre is notified. But as Tubeman mentioned, if one wants to suicide, they will find their ways.

The problem with this kind of system is when there is snow. If stations are constructed in a way where snow cannot enter the trackbed on an elevated stations, it's not too big of a problem. But if they aren't, then the intrusion systems must be turned off and station attendants must be present at the platforms themselves. Depending on the amount of snow, which doesn't happen in Vancouver often anyway, there are some instances where the trains are operated manually.

Either way though, systems need to be modernized in order to keep a system running smoothly. This will probably mean new signal systems or major improvements to old ones. So automation could be implemented slowly, replacing the aging infrastructure.

iampuking

June 22nd, 2010, 03:49 AM

It's not as stupid an idea as you might think.

It is perfectly possible to have unstaffed trains on LU, and to do so safely.

You throw in a lot of 'what ifs', but if you look at it rationally, on an ATO line like the Victoria the 'driver' only performs a function better performed by a human for about 5 seconds in every 3 minutes. That is, the act of closing the doors. The other 2 minutes 55 seconds of departing, accelerating, braking, stopping, and doors opening don't realistically require any human input at all... Although the 'driver' does press buttons to open doors and start the train, this could be easily automated too. Is it really cost effective to have a human sat on every single one of our peak service of 425 trains on £42,000 p.a.?

I honestly believe that once ATO is universal on LU lines (maybe 20 years time), with some technological developments we can have unstaffed trains. I'd envisage a control centre with remote operators responsible for several trains at once (for argument's sake, 5). They would have CCTV views of platforms, in each car, and forward facing from the train front. Between stations, the forward view would be shown, then as a train approaches a platform, the view would switch to that platform for assurance that the track and platform edge are clear and remain on the platform as the train stops, doors open, and passengers alight and board. After a predetermined timetabled dwell time, the doors would automatically close and the train depart unless the remote operator over-rides (e.g. due to heavy loading), and perhaps there could be an alarm if any doors are obstructed to alert the remote operator to investigate why.

The remote operator would be able to make public address announcements in the trains under their control, either routine service update announcements to all, or an announcement into a specific car on a specific train to admonish kids dicking about or respond to a passenger alarm / passenger query.

So, emergencies... Well if someone purposefully jumps under a train at the last second, no amount of technology is going to stop that without PEDs. In the event that someone has accidentally fallen onto the track, this would be spotted by the remote operator and the train stopped in time (if this is possible), or there could be some form of infra-red detection system along platforms as described before. There are emergency stop plungers on ATO line platforms too, as a further safeguard.

Train breaks down between stations... On modern stocks the driver is pretty much useless. On older stocks which have air pipes with cocks and simple electric circuits with chunky fuses which blow and can be replaced, the driver is also a train technician and can rectify almost all train defects and get the train moving again. When a 92, 95 or 96 (and now 2009 or S) stock breaks down, it's generally fucked and the driver can do very little but wait for a train maintainer to appear and change a circuit board, so driver or not there's no difference really. All that a driver on a modern stock has is access to the on-board computerised train monitoring system which flags up what the defect is and where it is, this information could simply be transmitted to the remote operator instead. Indeed, the remote operator could basically go through all the checks a driver on board could go through remotely and even attempt to rectify remotely if possible... The days of a driver running up and down a defective train lifting up seats and cutting bits of equipment in and out will soon be over.

If a train does become irreparably defective between stations, on a modern stock all the driver does is make reassuring announcements and waits for assistance. The PAs can be made remotely by the remote operator. Everything that follows (usually the train behind being detrained and sent forward with a Train maintainer to assist, 'pushing out' if necessary), it doesn't really make any difference whether there is a driver on the stricken train or not.

Detraining between stations is always the absolute last resort, the train must literally be totally immobile (including being pushed or pulled by another train) before this is considered. For this reason I think emergency walkways are a little bit of a moot point: they should very very rarely be necessary. Whenever a train is detrained in the tunnel even now, nothing can happen until assisting staff from the station ahead have walked back to the train (drivers cannot perform this function alone) to count customers off the train and back on the platform, standing by hazards and obstacles, etc. On 7/7 no trains were detrained until station staff reached them, so what would be so different without a driver on board? As I said, the remote operator continues to make reassuring PAs, can pass instructions, interact with passengers via 2-way communications (like modern passenger alarms), and so forth.

In terms of cost-benefit I think there is a very strong argument for remote operation, and I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if it's been introduced on at least a couple of lines by the time I retire from LU.

Wahey, never expected such an essay. It all depends on whether the money of installing all of this equipment to display CCTV views from a central control centre and to employ all the people to manage the trains from there is cheaper than the current setup. Also this would ever rival the safety provided by a human on the train.

AFAIK, the tories don't plan on going through the trouble you have listed to make LU driverless but instead want a DLR style solution. Except without the passenger assistant.

allurban

June 22nd, 2010, 07:31 AM

I don't know if it is just me, but I cannot recall any recent photo postings or discussion of the tramlink service.

Anything interesting going on with that service? Id like to take a ride when I am in the UK in August.

Cheers, m

PortoNuts

June 22nd, 2010, 07:02 PM

Tubeman

June 22nd, 2010, 07:26 PM

Wahey, never expected such an essay. It all depends on whether the money of installing all of this equipment to display CCTV views from a central control centre and to employ all the people to manage the trains from there is cheaper than the current setup. Also this would ever rival the safety provided by a human on the train.

AFAIK, the tories don't plan on going through the trouble you have listed to make LU driverless but instead want a DLR style solution. Except without the passenger assistant.

I decided to write a lot to explain my rationale, because I knew if I didn't you'd just start arguing with me :)

(it clearly worked)

Remote Operation is being seriously considered by LU long term, regardless of what some Tories just said last week. It is part of our strategy.

Look at it rationally: to introduce it on the Victoria Line once the 2009 TS has been introduced, what investment is required?

- ATO - Check
- CCTV in each car - Check
- Complete CCTV coverage of each platform-train interface - Check
- Wireless communications system - Check
- Ability for control to patch into train-borne public address - Check
- 2-way Passenger alarm communication - Check
- Emergency stop plungers on every platform - Check

So it's basically all there... All that's missing is the capability to remotely give the 'start' and door open / close commands, and activate the emergency brake, and transmission of the CCTV images back to control... All this could be very easily achieved via the 'Connect' radio system with small modifications.

As soon as this is done, you can set up a chap in the control centre to oversee 5 trains simultaneously on £40k rather than paying 5 times that for 5 drivers. Pays for itself within months, I suspect.

iampuking

June 23rd, 2010, 02:55 AM

^^ So you don't at all agree with that the Tories only want the tube to become driverless to fulfil their ideological agenda to diminish union power?

allurban

June 23rd, 2010, 09:19 AM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tramlinkthanks for the information - very useful - but Id also like to see more photos and comments here.

Cheers, m

Tubeman

June 23rd, 2010, 07:33 PM

^^ So you don't at all agree with that the Tories only want the tube to become driverless to fulfil their ideological agenda to diminish union power?

I couldn't give a monkeys what their motives are.

My interest would be in terms of saving huge amounts of staffing costs long-term, which could either equate to cheaper travel or money for investment / expansion of the network. I'll make no bones about it; being a 'driver' on a deep-level ATO line is boring, mind numbing and soul destroying. I think it's bordering on the inhumane that people have to sit on the front of Victoria Line trains day in, day out. That's why it's well paid.

They're fools if they think this would diminish union power anyway... The remote operators could just as easily go on strike.

Pansori

June 24th, 2010, 01:21 AM

Why not to try this on a few less-busy lines and see what happens?

Although I guess the human culture factor is an important factor as well. I was amazed by the "system" that works in Honk Kong's MTR. During the peak hours people simply wait near where the train doors are about to open and board the train if possible. Noone tries to get in "at any cost" but rather waits for the next train (which will come in 1 minute anyway, typically without any delays). Of course, that requires an extra staff at the station who would be in charge of moderating and maintaining the passengers in case some of them go a little over the top. That, however, is only necessary during the peak hours and can be done by unqualified staff (see what I mean: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/254/446584510_22d698c739_o.jpg the girl is the staff who is only responsible for "guiding" the passengers. Pretty much all of the time she's just standing there and doing nothing since all passengers are well aware of how they must behave. She's probably working just a few hours a day).

BMoiz_

June 24th, 2010, 02:07 AM

It's not that strange. Once you've been caught by the doors as you try to get onto the train you learn pretty quickly not to do it again, especially when there's a computer controlling the train and no-one's going to open the doors again for you. If Parisians can understand that, then so can Londoners

iampuking

June 24th, 2010, 03:11 AM

I couldn't give a monkeys what their motives are.

My interest would be in terms of saving huge amounts of staffing costs long-term, which could either equate to cheaper travel or money for investment / expansion of the network. I'll make no bones about it; being a 'driver' on a deep-level ATO line is boring, mind numbing and soul destroying. I think it's bordering on the inhumane that people have to sit on the front of Victoria Line trains day in, day out. That's why it's well paid.

They're fools if they think this would diminish union power anyway... The remote operators could just as easily go on strike.

Where have the Tories said they planned remote operation?

And you've missed my point. My original post was comparing LU with modern metro systems, with the assumption that if LU were to become driverless, it would be a bog-standard system like on the DLR. This "remote operation" malarky is something i've never personally heard of. And i'm also interested in why you decided to focus solely on my arguments when I was not the only one to voice concerns about driverless operation, a bone to pick, perhaps?

coth

June 24th, 2010, 02:30 PM

Tubeman

June 24th, 2010, 07:48 PM

Where have the Tories said they planned remote operation?

And you've missed my point. My original post was comparing LU with modern metro systems, with the assumption that if LU were to become driverless, it would be a bog-standard system like on the DLR. This "remote operation" malarky is something i've never personally heard of. And i'm also interested in why you decided to focus solely on my arguments when I was not the only one to voice concerns about driverless operation, a bone to pick, perhaps?

Jesus not again... :ohno:

iampuking

June 25th, 2010, 03:30 AM

^^ Maybe if you adopted a less rude tone then it wouldn't happen so often. ;)

Tubeman

June 25th, 2010, 09:07 PM

Funny that it only seems to be you...

alonzo-ny

June 25th, 2010, 10:36 PM

Tubey is faultless in his knowledge. Bow down before him.

Pansori

June 26th, 2010, 03:44 PM

NCT

June 26th, 2010, 06:55 PM

Tubey is faultless in his knowledge. Bow down before him.

+1

flierfy

June 26th, 2010, 06:58 PM

iampuking

June 27th, 2010, 04:09 AM

Tubey is faultless in his knowledge. Bow down before him.

I beg to differ. Numerous times he's spoken rubbish on his thread and i've been too polite to call him out on it. This politeness is something he obviously lacks...

Tubeman

June 27th, 2010, 09:03 AM

Guys, I witnessed one rather bizarre sighting. I use Waterloo and City line regularly and a few days ago one of the trains approaching me was substantially vandalized by a graffiti painting. I just wonder how on earth this could happen since all W&C infrastructure seems to be underground and there is no open access to the line or depot. How can this happen?

Anyway, I just don't understand what's happening it those people's heads. Why on earth would anyone do something so senseless and harmful which costs us all money to fix?

A small section of the depot at Waterloo is open-air... if you look down the tunnel toward the depot from the platform, you can see the chinks of daylight.

I've picked out the shed below, there is a track in the open but it's hidden by shadow:

http://i46.tinypic.com/23msncp.jpg

There's bound to be access ladders down from Spur Road which could be used to gain access... The alternative is they just walked off the end of the platform after the last train one evening (bear in mind this is relatively early), or maybe just pushed a gate open separating the W&C from the rest of Waterloo LU station on a Sunday (when the W&C is closed).

I guess it's quite an attractive target, as the tiny depot at Waterloo wouldn't have any dedicated equipment or materials for removing graffiti as it's hardly common on that line, and the only way in or out for the trains is a car at a time by crane. They would have to get the chemicals sent from another depot.

Tubeman

June 27th, 2010, 09:17 AM

I beg to differ. Numerous times he's spoken rubbish on his thread and i've been too polite to call him out on it. This politeness is something he obviously lacks...

I don't claim to know everything about everything, sometimes I have been wrong and have happily admitted this, other times I've made educated guesses in the absence of information, but the vast majority of my responses are factually correct.

Considering the amount of effort I put into my responses, your comment above is plain rude... with the added irony of claiming some sort of politeness moral high ground at the same time.

You are perpetually and pedantically spoiling for a fight, and not just with me, but with several forumers. It's very tiresome.

iampuking

June 27th, 2010, 10:18 PM

^^ No, all i've done is engage in what a forum is about, discussion. All you do is just roll your eyes when I disagree with you and then presumptuously decide the exchange is over. You also write massive essays and then claim i'm "starting arguments" when I don't agree with every single word of it. Who are you to draw the line at when a discussion turns into an argument?

I agree that you're probably right about a lot of things but sometimes you're wrong, therefore my last response wasn't even to you, it was to a selection of your cronies that insisted I should "bow down" to your "fautless knowledge".

And btw, I spend a good time on my posts too. Look at the start of this thread if you don't agree.

iampuking

June 28th, 2010, 09:53 PM

Anyway, sorry if we've (not I've) created a sour atmosphere. Here's a video of the 09TS at Green Park to lighten the mood:

5cVaB4c_ExI

heywindup

June 28th, 2010, 10:40 PM

Will the LU eventually have walk-through carriages?

Tubeman

June 28th, 2010, 10:47 PM

Anyway, sorry if I've created a sour atmosphere.

Corrected... And apology accepted :)

Tubeman

June 28th, 2010, 10:52 PM

Will the LU eventually have walk-through carriages?

All subsurface stock will be when the S Stock is universal (Metropolitan, Circle, H&C and District Lines), S Stocks are undergoing testing on the Metropolitan Line currently and will enter passenger service in a few months.

Not happening any time soon with Tube stock however, as the 2009 Stock is not walk-through.

iampuking

June 29th, 2010, 03:57 AM

Corrected... And apology accepted :)

Nice to see you've rivalled Stalin in the history-manipulation stakes. ;)

June 29th, 2010, 06:13 AM

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered amongst the sea of other posts on recent pages, but how many 2009 stock trains have now entered service on the Victoria Line?

Tubeman

June 29th, 2010, 08:04 PM

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered amongst the sea of other posts on recent pages, but how many 2009 stock trains have now entered service on the Victoria Line?

8 I think

Tubeman

June 29th, 2010, 08:06 PM

Nice to see you've rivalled Stalin in the history-manipulation stakes. ;)

Would you believe that a mean RMT rep circulated a flyer around the Bakerloo Line comparing me to Joe Stalin?

...Just 'cos my name's Joe... ...And I pissed him off... ;)

PortoNuts

June 29th, 2010, 11:12 PM

Southwark Station - Jubilee Line

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/7442/294826540683286dd891b1.jpg

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/3303/1639957952c20f8722e2b1.jpg

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/7197/3781192015f47454b3efb1.jpg

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9620/2942897302e8b3e36080b1.jpg

http://img715.imageshack.us/img715/5104/3299146785970941493fb1.jpg

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/1088/30853426916f617745ao1.jpg

http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/6376/308535538c61d7a3e45o1.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/55935853@N00/2948265406/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/12635891@N05/1639957952/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/diorama_sky/3781192015/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/trentm/2942897302/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/willskii/3299146785/sizes/l/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dryasadingo/308534269/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dryasadingo/308535538/sizes/o/in/set-72157594413538614/

Acemcbuller

June 30th, 2010, 12:43 AM

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered amongst the sea of other posts on recent pages, but how many 2009 stock trains have now entered service on the Victoria Line?

Underground News (http://lurs.org.uk/undergroundnews.htm) June 2010 edition said: train 7 was being delivered making six trains commissioned for service. Train 2 to return to Derby soon.
(I think train 1 already has)

PortoNuts

June 30th, 2010, 01:38 PM

But are all trains on Victoria Line being replaced?

Acemcbuller

June 30th, 2010, 08:36 PM

But are all trains on Victoria Line being replaced?
Yes, and the track and the signalling system.
Trouble is the two stocks and signalling systems have to work in parallel during the switch over.

PortoNuts

July 1st, 2010, 03:18 AM

Yes, and the track and the signalling system.
Trouble is the two stocks and signalling systems have to work in parallel during the switch over.

Thanks :okay:

Great to see the replacement. Is any other line seeing replacements apart from Victoria?

sweek

July 1st, 2010, 08:28 AM

Thanks :okay:

Great to see the replacement. Is any other line seeing replacements apart from Victoria?

Metropolitan, H&C, Circle and District... and eventually all the Overground trains should be replaced as well, I think?

marciomaco

July 1st, 2010, 09:28 PM

Didn't you ever think about separate the Northern line in two lines?

Northern line -> Edgware - Bank branch - Morden
Morden and City line -> High Barnet - Charing Cross branch - Kennington and maybe Peckham Rye Rail Station. In this line, Mill Hill East branch will be disused.

July 2nd, 2010, 03:58 AM

sweek

July 2nd, 2010, 07:44 AM

How many passengers presently use Mill Hill East?

Just over a million. It's not going to close - it's quite useful and good for short runnings too, and the shuttle is doing its job for the rest of the day. It also causes zero problems on the rest of the line so why would you bother?

Anyway, yes, there is talk about splitting them, but it would be Edgware - Charing Cross - Kennington and High Barnet/MHE - Bank - Morden. It's the only way as each line would need a depot - there are two of them, one at Morden and one at Golders Green - so you can't have Golders Green and Morden both on one line!

lightrail

July 2nd, 2010, 05:50 PM

Just over a million. It's not going to close - it's quite useful and good for short runnings too, and the shuttle is doing its job for the rest of the day. It also causes zero problems on the rest of the line so why would you bother?

Anyway, yes, there is talk about splitting them, but it would be Edgware - Charing Cross - Kennington and High Barnet/MHE - Bank - Morden. It's the only way as each line would need a depot - there are two of them, one at Morden and one at Golders Green - so you can't have Golders Green and Morden both on one line!

Not to mention that physically, Charing Cross trains have an underground balloon loop just south of Kennington so trains can turn back without switching ends.

I also understand that plans are fairly advanced to extend the Charing Cross branch south from Kennington to Nine Elms, with the new lines branching out from the loop south of Kennington.

http://www.tunneltalk.com/London-Underground-Oct09-Northern-Line-extension-to-Battersea.php

One thing preventing the separation of the Northern Line into two lines is the inadequate underground interchange currently available at Camden Town. Camden Town is really two deep-level stations (two platforms on the Edgeware Branch and two platforms on the High Barnet Branch), joined by connecting passageways and with a single surface building. The station could not handle the interchange traffic caused by splitting the line into two.

For train operations, there are no issues, other than the limitation on the depots as indicated above. The junction south of Camden Town can handle any combination of route without interfering with any other route.

Camden Town Station and Junction - and can you imagine building a deep-level junction line that today?
http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/athens/acropolis/7069/ltcamden.jpg

Kennington station and Balloon Loop
http://husk.org/www.geocities.com/athens/acropolis/7069/ltkenn.gif

images source: husk.org

iampuking

July 3rd, 2010, 03:42 AM

Thanks :okay:

Great to see the replacement. Is any other line seeing replacements apart from Victoria?

All of the sub-surface lines. The Jubilee line is set to get automatic train operation (ATO) in 2011. The Northern is set to get it after. Then the Piccadilly with new trains/signalling, and then finally the Bakerloo with new trains and signalling too. The scheduel is hazy because of funding issues and the PPP etc.

PortoNuts

July 3rd, 2010, 03:28 PM

Thanks once again, good trains play an essential role in quality service. :cheers2:

PortoNuts

July 4th, 2010, 06:26 PM

yR9o-fP8Lec

iampuking

July 7th, 2010, 01:59 AM

New S Stock being tested:

at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/oiyou/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1001/4734021663_3cbacb68d2.jpg

iampuking

July 7th, 2010, 02:06 AM

This gives an idea how old the signalling on LU is. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/24772733@N05/4753297398/in/set-72157604401112037/)

PortoNuts

July 7th, 2010, 09:40 PM

The new stock is really 'bulky', love it. :cheers2:

ajw373

July 7th, 2010, 10:14 PM

The new stock is really 'bulky', love it. :cheers2:

Not as bulky as the existing stock they are replacing on the Metropolitan line!

PortoNuts

July 9th, 2010, 06:59 PM

Canary Wharf DRL Station

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/9003/3220093325edc1f49128b1.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpmarks/3220093325/sizes/l/

Neb81

July 11th, 2010, 01:09 AM

Underground News (http://lurs.org.uk/undergroundnews.htm) June 2010 edition said: train 7 was being delivered making six trains commissioned for service. Train 2 to return to Derby soon.
(I think train 1 already has)

Heard about this project before. The cost of it seems a bit pointless to add two stations, one of which is near two existing stations.

I'd propose spending more money, but getting a MUCH bigger bang for the buck, by continuing the line to Clapham Junction, Wandsworth Town (both badly isolated from LU), then on to link up with the Wimbledon branch of the district line, taking that over from a new interchange station at Southfields to Wimbledon. From there it would be possible to extend south-east, taking over the Wimbledon to Sutton section of the Sutton Loop, which would drastically improve service in those areas, and take some of the load off the Morden branch.

poshbakerloo

July 11th, 2010, 02:06 AM

New S Stock being tested:

at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/oiyou/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1001/4734021663_3cbacb68d2.jpg

From the side these trains do look pretty good. Not to keen on the cab ends tho

PortoNuts

July 11th, 2010, 03:59 AM

VwKaQNyKPKo

Neb81

July 11th, 2010, 12:20 PM

From the side these trains do look pretty good. Not to keen on the cab ends tho

It looks very similar to that used on the 2009 stock, which makes sense as they are both basically Movia class trains under the skin, though the end styling for both seems to heavily echo the 1992 stock as well (I read somewhere this wasn't accidental).

Comfortably Numb

July 11th, 2010, 03:18 PM

VwKaQNyKPKo

Not a fan of the glass doors on the platform. I like to be able to see the train coming down the tunnel. I'm sure they're a major plus safety wise though.

PortoNuts

July 12th, 2010, 05:26 AM

Not a fan of the glass doors on the platform. I like to be able to see the train coming down the tunnel. I'm sure they're a major plus safety wise though.

I'm also not particularly fond of the glass doors but I'm sure they are more worried about safety than aesthetics.

WatcherZero

July 13th, 2010, 06:59 PM

So Tfl has cut £10m from the £30m/y cooling budget.

I suppose short term wont make a huge difference though long term it will.

PortoNuts

July 14th, 2010, 07:52 PM

Warren Street Station - Northern Line/Victoria Line

http://a.imageshack.us/img718/4884/477270883800513eb1ceb1.jpg
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/4772708838/sizes/l/

PortoNuts

July 14th, 2010, 08:31 PM

XYDhMNaWFfw

Paul Easton

July 15th, 2010, 10:58 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p008vfj5

London Underground's David Leboff offers a guided tour round St Mary's in East London, which closed in 1938, and is one of the tube network's least well-known or visited disused stations.

St Mary's is one of the hidden gems featured in The London Nobody Knows, part of the BBC Radio 4 London Season.

PortoNuts

July 15th, 2010, 11:37 PM

Poplar DLR Station

http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/5734/3115425999e4a2bf4586b1.jpg

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/4658/311542627158c7470247b1.jpg

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/7906/3113164502f6c57cdf74b1.jpg

http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/8933/3116253320c13733598bb1.jpg

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/5315/43079332030a3f27c5e1b1.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12445197@N05/tags/poplar/

iampuking

July 16th, 2010, 02:20 AM

Video of the new S Stock testing under it's own power. Notice how the acceleration is less aggressive than the new 09 Stock, this is because it's manually driven rather than ATO.

GlqWP1xuXCw

coth

July 16th, 2010, 09:32 AM

Wikipedia says both have 1.3 m/s^2. I remember there were a video with very rapid acceleration on underground station. But seems it was just a visual delusion.

1.3 m/s^2 is just good. Like most modern metro trains.

PortoNuts

July 16th, 2010, 06:44 PM

Really smooth.

Video of the new S Stock testing under it's own power. Notice how the acceleration is less aggressive than the new 09 Stock, this is because it's manually driven rather than ATO.

GlqWP1xuXCw

PortoNuts

July 18th, 2010, 12:12 AM

W8qr80jjZtE

Tubeman

July 18th, 2010, 10:47 AM

Video of the new S Stock testing under it's own power. Notice how the acceleration is less aggressive than the new 09 Stock, this is because it's manually driven rather than ATO.

It will be retarded on purpose until the Subsurface routes are resignalled.

Interestingly the District D Stocks are capable of much better acceleration / braking and higher speeds, but have always been retarded because their potential performance exceeds signalling capacity and layout. The benefit was that when the fleet was recently refurbished, which added a ton extra weight to some cars, the tractions motor performance could be upped to compensate.

I once drove a D Stock which appeared to have inadvertently had the retardation removed or at least significant diminished, it was scarily fast to accelerate and brake. I hit 50mph between Chiswick Park and Acton Town (just under 40mph would be typical normally), and was able to hit the platform at Acton Town at 40mph and still stop. I realised the unit was different as soon as I picked it up at Earl's Court, and had been pushing it all the way westbound to see just how good the acceleration / braking was. sadly I was on Ealing - Tower Hill rounders so never got a chance to really go for it on the run out to Upminster. Never drove it again, at least not with that performance.

PortoNuts

July 18th, 2010, 05:40 PM

^^Aren't they changing the signalling? If so we should expect an increase of the average speed between stations right?

Tubeman

July 18th, 2010, 07:29 PM

^^Aren't they changing the signalling? If so we should expect an increase of the average speed between stations right?

Yes but it will be very expensive so I'd not like to guess when this will actually happen

PortoNuts

July 18th, 2010, 08:10 PM

It would be a pity if they didn't took advantage of the real speed capacity of trains.

I read something here about the old and the new signalling being used simultaneously at the moment until the replacement of the rolling stock is not finished.

PortoNuts

July 18th, 2010, 08:58 PM

a9XI5rEw0Wo

garcia.calavera

July 19th, 2010, 01:30 PM

is it just me or the interior of the trains feels rather small and cramped?... the platforms seem kind of small to
ps: when the train stopped why didn't it leave to the next station?

lightrail

July 19th, 2010, 05:49 PM

is it just me or the interior of the trains feels rather small and cramped?... the platforms seem kind of small to
ps: when the train stopped why didn't it leave to the next station?

Are you serious?

The Waterloo and City opened in 1898. Station size was established then.

You can't built a train any bigger than the tunnel diameter

Train doesn't continue because it is the end of the line. Waterloo and City is a two station shuttle line.

garcia.calavera

July 19th, 2010, 07:34 PM

PortoNuts

July 19th, 2010, 07:39 PM

is it just me or the interior of the trains feels rather small and cramped?... the platforms seem kind of small to
ps: when the train stopped why didn't it leave to the next station?

Compared to other mass transit systems I've used I would say they are more spacious simply because of the parallel seating, which gives much more room.

And don't forget LU is the oldest metro system in the world, you can't change the all network overnight. With the exception of that corner at the end of the platform (in the video), I can't see any problem with the platform size.

scalatrava89

July 19th, 2010, 10:19 PM

From the side these trains do look pretty good. Not to keen on the cab ends tho

New S Stock looks great. Which lines will these be installed on?

Tubeman

July 20th, 2010, 12:06 AM

New S Stock looks great. Which lines will these be installed on?

Metropolitan, Hammersmith & City, Circle & District

CairnsTony

July 20th, 2010, 04:25 PM

so they choose to build small cramped trains instead of building future tunnels bigger and modernising old ones? :nuts: i'm pretty sure other cities confronted this problem and didn't found the best solution to adapt all present and future trains to 19 century tunnels
As others have pointed out many times, the Waterloo and City was built in the 19th century making it one of the very earliest deep-bore tube lines in the world. You would have to rebuild it from scratch in a wider bore tunnel to have bigger trains; which I don't think are cramped btw, having used this line myself.

The best reason I reckon for doing this on the W&C line however would be to make it possible to extend it, which would be very difficult on its current alignment at the Bank end at least.

I'm not sure what you mean about rebuilding old 19th century tube tunnels elsewhere in the world. Could you give some examples?

lightrail

July 21st, 2010, 04:51 AM

so they choose to build small cramped trains instead of building future tunnels bigger and modernising old ones? :nuts: i'm pretty sure other cities confronted this problem and didn't found the best solution to adapt all present and future trains to 19 century tunnels

I don't see a problem. The station and trains are big enough for the volumes. Extending the line north is not possible as other tube tunnels are in the way - the platform tunnels would have to be closed and new platform tunnels built at a different level and orientation. Extending south makes no sense either as this would duplicate Bakerloo and Northern lines in an area well served by Network rail trains. Seems to me that London can spend its money on more worthy and less costly upgrades. The Waterloo and City is effective at what it does - move peak commuters from The City to Waterloo Station.

makita09

July 21st, 2010, 10:06 AM

so they choose to build small cramped trains instead of building future tunnels bigger and modernising old ones? :nuts:

What is crazy about that? On the basis new trains costs about a tenth of what you are suggesting it seems quite sensible.

PortoNuts

July 21st, 2010, 10:26 PM

zoQS8hlRr9I

PortoNuts

July 23rd, 2010, 12:48 AM

1-hc14BOSgo

PortoNuts

July 23rd, 2010, 07:45 PM

Tottenham Hale Station - Victoria Line

http://img135.imageshack.us/img135/5073/477273446018f8f673bdb1.jpg

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/9073/4772739784bbe86e92f6b1.jpg

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/1461/477209748311fdacd3bfb1.jpg

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tompagenet/tags/tottenhamhale/

Tubeman

July 23rd, 2010, 07:59 PM

^^
One day I reckon someone will accidentally trip over the step-free 'hump' or a tactile paving slab and end up under a train

iampuking

July 24th, 2010, 03:44 AM

^^ At least at this station the raised section actually matches the rest of the flooring.

PortoNuts

July 25th, 2010, 03:25 AM

^^
One day I reckon someone will accidentally trip over the step-free 'hump' or a tactile paving slab and end up under a train

The ramp doesn't look like it has a big slop.

Tubeman

July 25th, 2010, 10:38 AM

The ramp doesn't look like it has a big slop.

It's not, but it's a bit disconcerting the first time you encounter one. I could honestly see someone in a rush down the platform being caught out and tripping over the slope, gentle or not.

PortoNuts

July 25th, 2010, 08:32 PM

ALsGjgdrIvs

PortoNuts

July 25th, 2010, 10:48 PM

49wLeC6iLEg

PortoNuts

July 26th, 2010, 06:19 PM

xlXzx4fgfU0

PortoNuts

July 26th, 2010, 11:08 PM

New Tube seating fabric captures the spirit of London

http://img529.imageshack.us/img529/851/tflluseat88876951.jpg

London Underground (LU) revealed the winner of a public competition to design a brand new Tube seating fabric. A London-based company called WallaceSewell, famous for their patterned woven scarves, beat over 350 entries from around the world to win.

Their bold design was chosen because it captured the spirit of London as well as meeting the judges' demanding technical brief. With around three-and-a-half million customers using the Tube every day, entrants were asked to create a fabric design that would be practical and contemporary.

Innovative design is part of the Tube's identity and history.

Shades of blue and red

The Tube seat fabric, also known as moquette, needed to be something that according to the brief, translated well into a woven material.

Designers were told that it should not be too jazzy or complicated and that it should not have too large a repeat pattern - as this would help to economise on materials when cut to fit the seats.

The winning design is based on shades of blue with red highlights.

WallaceSewell's starting point was London landmarks which were turned into abstract primary shapes like circles, triangles and squares allowing customers to interpret the pattern as they wish.

Soft and comfortable

As part of the TfL Investment Programme the fabric will be used on refurbished Central line trains from the middle of 2011 and on other new trains where possible.

The colours and design reflect the iconic LU brand.

LU is one of the few Metro operators which has not changed to plastic or metal seating.

It is hoped that this high-quality moquette, which is soft and comfortable, will enhance customers' journeys.

Distinctive pattern

Richard Parry, Strategy and Commercial Director for LU, said: 'We chose the WallaceSewell entry because it captures the spirit of London.

'Quality design has always played a very important role at London Underground and this distinctive pattern reflects our corporate brand perfectly.

'The standard was extremely high but this unusual seating fabric - which is practical, attractive and economical - met the very tight design brief on every level.'

The WallaceSewell two-woman team also created the moquette for the new London Overground trains, Croydon trams and the East London Transit.

Emma Sewell, WallaceSewell, said: 'It's a real honour to win this competition.

Rich design heritage

'We can't wait to see our creation on Tube trains and see how passengers react to our design.'

Co-designer Harriet Wallace-Jones, WallaceSewell, said: 'We've always admired the world famous London Underground seating fabrics and colours.

'Nothing beats the feeling that you are going to be part of the Tube's rich design heritage.'

The judges included Lynda Relph-Knight, editor for Design Week, Rachel Halliburton, deputy editor for Time Out magazine and Robert Elms, BBC London radio broadcaster.

http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/newsdetails.aspx?News_id=88876

PortoNuts

July 28th, 2010, 03:29 AM

xl58vWF2Qds

PortoNuts

July 28th, 2010, 11:51 PM

233PUiCRZoQ

Tubeman

July 30th, 2010, 12:33 AM

First S Stock will officially run in passenger service on Monday, with a preview run on Saturday

2009 Stock now up to 10/47 so more than 20% of the fleet (albeit with some very high-profile failures this week)

Davodavo

July 30th, 2010, 06:49 PM

XMPT8VuwDUU

PortoNuts

July 30th, 2010, 07:22 PM

^^What rolling stock is that?

Davodavo

July 30th, 2010, 07:31 PM

^^What rolling stock is that?

:dunno:

I'm more than sorry to say that I have no idea LOL.

PortoNuts

July 30th, 2010, 07:34 PM

No problem ;). But it looks like the C Stock.

iampuking

July 31st, 2010, 02:59 AM

^^ It's the 1973 Stock running on the Piccadilly line.

PortoNuts

August 1st, 2010, 12:24 AM

^^Thanks for clarifying.

Davodavo

August 1st, 2010, 12:27 AM

^^ It's the 1973 Stock running on the Piccadilly line.

^^Thanks for clarifying.

^^ +1, thank you iampuking :)

PortoNuts

August 2nd, 2010, 01:03 AM

5cVaB4c_ExI

iampuking

August 2nd, 2010, 02:56 AM

The S Stock ran for the first time in passenger service on Saturday... here's my write up.

New Sub-Surface lines Trains (London Underground S Stock)

First Passenger Journey: 31st of July, 2010.

As the A Stock on the Metropolitan line is now 50 years old, new rolling stock is desperately needed. The capacity of the Metropolitan line (and to a lesser effect the rest of the Sub Surface network) is currently limited by old signalling and old trains with low performance (bad acceleration/decceleration). The trains are 8 cars long for the Metropolitan line, and 7 cars long for the rest of the SS network, they are known as S8 Stock and S7 Stock respectively. This means that on the Cicle and Hammersmith & City lines there will be an increase in capacity, as the existing stock is 6 cars long platforms at stations on the western side of the H&C/Circle lines will either be lengthened or selective door operation will be used. The seating layout also differs for the Metropolitan line trains, it will be half transverse and half longitudinal which suits the more commuter-rail-like nature of the line. The 7 car trains for the rest of the SS network will be all longitudinal. These trains are the first on the network to be fully walkthrough, and are also the first to have full air-conditioning. Air-conditioning is possible on the SS network as the tunnels were originally designed with several gaps located in cuttings which allowed the original steam-powered trains to gases. They will also feature 1.3m/s/s acceleration and have a top speed of 62mph/100km/h. The trains will enter service with manual operation on the existing signalling and eventually modern signalling will replace it, taking advantage of the train's increased performance. The total amount of trains will be 191, trains will enter service on the Metropolitan first, then the Circle/Hammersmith & City, and then the District. This is because the District has the most modern rolling stock, which has recently been refurbished.

Current trains (London Underground A Stock)

Exterior

AndrewHA ! at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/21611052@N02/)
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2620/4138044594_b5b5852d1a.jpg

Kurt Raschke at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/kurtraschke/)
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1007/1031007444_4835bb8f3b.jpg

Interior

stephenk1977 at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stephenk1977/)
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/93/221306941_fe61a8bca9.jpg

Video

AhEn3b2HiT4

MD3jEUtL3yY

New trains (London Underground 'S8' Stock)

Exterior

Justin Foulger at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/justinfoulger/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4138/4795891585_943a7dcfec.jpg

londonstuff at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/londonstuff/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/4845724435_e7635888f7.jpg

Interior

londonstuff at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/londonstuff/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4150/4845727591_4753847869.jpg

londonstuff at Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/londonstuff/)
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/4845725493_31c0afec0b.jpg

Video

GH1dCK-YeVM

Tubeman

August 2nd, 2010, 11:22 AM

The total amount of trains will be 133

That must just be the S7 figure... the total number of S Stock trains on order is 191.

iampuking

August 2nd, 2010, 06:06 PM

^^ Edited. Could you please add this to the first post?

PortoNuts

August 2nd, 2010, 09:19 PM

I like this trains as much and the London Overground trains. :cheers:

PortoNuts

August 4th, 2010, 12:43 AM

S Stock interior.

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/6453/4847035770c1ea62e749b1.jpg

scalatrava89

August 4th, 2010, 02:29 AM

iampuking

August 4th, 2010, 04:02 AM

New S Stock racing with the A Stock.

fGFm6oVOfTw

makita09

August 4th, 2010, 10:31 AM

I have read complaints by certain rail enthusiasts on the web that the S-stock is a totally innappropriate replacement for the A-stock.

I do not believe this for a minute as everything that I have seen so far I agree with (eg half longitudinal seats, good acceleration/top speed), but what are the percieved problems? Or is it just typical nonsensical moaning?

Fatfield

August 4th, 2010, 11:59 AM

sotonsi

August 4th, 2010, 12:41 PM

How many train buffs turned out? :lol: You all should of cheered when it pulled away at the end. SO what did you think of the new stock PortoNuts? The main benefit is obviously the internal space, and light aerie feel.But, given A stock is the largest train running on British rails, interior space isn't an improvement, it's a carry on - you could argue that more standing space is a benefit, but the people of Northwood (and further out, but especially in the Northwood area) consider that a massive flaw, because it means less seats, so they will have to stand now. A Stock has a light aerie feel - it's only the newness of S stock on this that makes it better. I think those who commute on the Met line would have liked a new improved A stock (better seats, air con, perhaps 2+2 rather than 3+2, more speed, better accleration, etc). The big problem is that it's a stock designed for other lines - it's absolutely perfect for the District, and for the other two, it's rather good.I have read complaints by certain rail enthusiasts on the web that the S-stock is a totally innappropriate replacement for the A-stock.

I do not believe this for a minute as everything that I have seen so far I agree with (eg half longitudinal seats, good acceleration/top speed), but what are the percieved problems? Or is it just typical nonsensical moaning?The half longitudinal seats are the problem. Air con and the acceleration/top speed are great, as is replacing 50 year old trains. But to reduce the number of seats by the amount that they have, on the Met line where distances and travel times are long is a big mistake.

By all means, it's a good compromise stock for the SSLs, but the situation at Northwood (and other places, given longitutinal seats aren't as comfortable as transverse ones with they higher backs), where people who used to sit will now have to stand all the way in, isn't like the situation at Woodford (say), where the tube service, while having trains with less seats, provided a much better service than the NR one, so the pay off is bearable, and now (70 years later) no one knows better. With the move to S stock there's a slight increase in frequency and a slight decrease in travel time, but the people of Northwood and further out don't think it's worth it - the compromise removes A stock's bias towards them and the bonuses for them aren't good enough to make up for the backward step with the seats.

I can understand the arguments about the circle line bit needing the standing space, but whenever I've been on a Met train on the circle (which includes in the peaks), it's not crush loaded by a long shot, and there's enough room to stand with A stock.

The problem with S stock is that the Met line is used to better seating arrangements (though slightly worse standing arrangements) and Met line commuters disagree with the idea that there ought to be one stock for the varied SSLs.

They look brilliant trains for the District, H&C and Circle lines, but the compromise of the stock is just a bit too compromised for the Met line. It is indeed inappropriate for the line, especially given how A stock was fit for purpose. It's a line where you need big-wide trains to make the most of the tunnel size, where you need lots of seats, because the line is for commuting long distances, though also a decent amount of standing room (check out the big vestibule areas on A stock) due to the central London section. What has happened is that we now have narrower trains, and then less seats to make up the standing room (and now there's more than is necessary).

Completely irrelevant but, looking at the front, S stock is a bit ugly, aren't they?

iampuking

August 5th, 2010, 03:50 AM

mtj73

August 5th, 2010, 10:39 AM

^^ The narrowness of the S Stock compared to the A Stock is countered by the fact that there is standing room between the carriages, and that it allows a much smaller gap between the train and the platform.

Although I agree that the reduction in seats is a shame, It also is countered. The S Stock is fully walkthrough, meaning people can walk down the train as far as they want to find a spare seat, currently the train is often crowded at one end and empty at the other, which is a waste. Secondly, I don't see how the Metropolitan's journeys are longer than other line's, the line is the one underground line to have fast and semi fast services, not forgetting the huge gap between Finchley Road and Baker Street...

And I disagree about the front, I think it's attractive, unusual and modern.
That's right, I don't understand why people always seem to overlook that fact. If the train is packed you would not of got a seat anyway, if it's not jam packed but all the seats and someone in another carrage stands up to get of at the next station it should be easy to grab it.

I would not want to stand for 40 minutes into work every day either but do the outer services really fill from the first station? I would of thought they would fill closer to the city but I am willing to be corrected on that.

sotonsi

August 5th, 2010, 02:43 PM

I had a big long post, but I'll just whittle it down to a few short-ish points

While a smaller train will fit better (and remember most people don't care too much about the gap - though obviously making it small for the few is a very good thing) in the centre, at places like Watford, etc, where the platform fits A stock pretty well (it's a tiny gap at Watford) the gap will be made bigger by the smaller stock. It's a non point to talk about gaps - in places it will be better, in others it'll be worse.
LU, with the A stock (designed for commuters from the outskirts) has made it exceptional (which you seem to despise, especially when it involves suburbia) - LU is now removing that and making it better. There would rightly be uproar if they decided to make new Central Line/Piccadilly stock work better for those in zones 4-6 at the expense of zone 1, this is the same thing - to make the trains suit the centre bit a bit more, but suit most of the line less. The problem isn't that S stock is bad, but that A stock was so well suited to the outer parts of the line, that anything that isn't as well suited is a backward step out there.
Any comparison to elsewhere on the tube network as far out must also have similar NR locations too - which have trains with lots of seats. Likewise there's no massive upgrade in service, like there was when things like Epping were tubified (direct trains deeper into Central London).
I agree with S stock, but I'm trying to put forward the reasons why people aren't happy, and why their complaints are somewhat valid - I do think they are making too much out of it, but they have been treated well by the tube for a while with A stock, and now they are going to be treated like Dagenham or Woodford - ie not as well. It is a backward step as far as they are concerned (they might not see the benefits at all, but for them the costs of having S stock, rather than a new special Met line train outweigh the benefits by a long way for the people out there - though it's not just them on the line!). The less good treatment of Dagenham and Woodford shouldn't mean that Northwood should be brought down - ideally the far ends of the District, Central, Piccadilly, etc would get trains that better suit them - it's the problem of the tube being metro and S-bahn at the same time. To say "tough, other people put up with it" is a bit like Ed Balls' schools policy which is pretty much that there should be no winners unless everyone can win, therefore we should all be losers.
The gap between Finchely Road and Baker Street has equivalents - Kings Cross to Caledonian Road and Highbury and Islington are about as far. The Central, Piccadilly and Victoria lines all have fast bits, even if there's no slow lines on some of them: Liverpool St - Stratford - see how many stops the District has going out to West Ham, Kings Cross - Seven Sisters, Earls Court - Acton Town. Are they equivalent - not quite, but still.
The front of S stock has a bit too much going on IMO - the lines aren't smooth, it's a bit too complex. I guess it's like the Multipla winning design awards - I remember seeing it for the first time in the Design Museum on a school trip - we saw the back first, and found it tolerable but then it rotated and their was a universal cry of disgust from the 10 or so of us looking at it - some of us couldn't even look at how ugly that double chin is, but then we hadn't had our taste generated by the design gurus. I'm sure I'll get used to it, like I did with the odd backs of cars, but I just find it ugly at the moment - not Multipla repulsive, but I'm not a fan.

To put it simply - S stock is adequate for the Met, but Met line customers are used to something better suited to the line's outer parts, being treated like they aren't on the tube, but not on BR either - best of both worlds. They are used to being treated differently from the rest of the Underground and are rightly upset (though they do somewhat have a false sense of entitlement) at their lose of this privilege. Is S stock the right thing to do - yes. Is it a kick in the teeth to the people of the Northwood area - yes.
That's right, I don't understand why people always seem to overlook that fact. If the train is packed you would not of got a seat anyway, if it's not jam packed but all the seats and someone in another carrage stands up to get of at the next station it should be easy to grab it.Surely those currently at the seat limit (Northwood/Pinner sort of area) will already move along the platform to go in at the emptiest carriages? Yes, with the walkways a few more might sit down, but it's still not all who try and board the train there.I would not want to stand for 40 minutes into work every day either but do the outer services really fill from the first station? I would of thought they would fill closer to the city but I am willing to be corrected on that.They don't, which why the heckles are from Northwood and Pinner, quite a few stops down the line (5 or 6), that now get a seat, but with the reduction in seats, won't all get them, even with the walk-throughs.

PortoNuts

August 5th, 2010, 11:02 PM

How many train buffs turned out? :lol: You all should of cheered when it pulled away at the end. SO what did you think of the new stock PortoNuts? The main benefit is obviously the internal space, and light aerie feel.

I agree with you on both things. I really like, they remind me the East London Line trains of LO and I'm a fan of those as well. Good quality trains are essential for LU, they are the core of the network so to speak. I can handle crappy stations but not crappy trains. They are the ones who keep the system going. :cheers:

iampuking

August 6th, 2010, 03:49 AM

I had a big long post, but I'll just whittle it down to a few short-ish points

While a smaller train will fit better (and remember most people don't care too much about the gap - though obviously making it small for the few is a very good thing) in the centre, at places like Watford, etc, where the platform fits A stock pretty well (it's a tiny gap at Watford) the gap will be made bigger by the smaller stock. It's a non point to talk about gaps - in places it will be better, in others it'll be worse.

Here's Watford station, the gap looks smaller on the S Stock to me.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4145/4846416085_0eefcee6af.jpg

LU, with the A stock (designed for commuters from the outskirts) has made it exceptional (which you seem to despise, especially when it involves suburbia) - LU is now removing that and making it better. There would rightly be uproar if they decided to make new Central Line/Piccadilly stock work better for those in zones 4-6 at the expense of zone 1, this is the same thing - to make the trains suit the centre bit a bit more, but suit most of the line less. The problem isn't that S stock is bad, but that A stock was so well suited to the outer parts of the line, that anything that isn't as well suited is a backward step out there.

There might be an uproar if the Piccadilly/Central had lots of seating in the first place, but AFAIK, they never have. That's why i'm unsympathetic as the S Stock still has more seats than most of the existing LU lines.

Any comparison to elsewhere on the tube network as far out must also have similar NR locations too - which have trains with lots of seats. Likewise there's no massive upgrade in service, like there was when things like Epping were tubified (direct trains deeper into Central London).

The Tube will always win as it goes direct into Central London... But I don't see why they should be compared as they are inherently completely different services.

I agree with S stock, but I'm trying to put forward the reasons why people aren't happy, and why their complaints are somewhat valid - I do think they are making too much out of it, but they have been treated well by the tube for a while with A stock, and now they are going to be treated like Dagenham or Woodford - ie not as well. It is a backward step as far as they are concerned (they might not see the benefits at all, but for them the costs of having S stock, rather than a new special Met line train outweigh the benefits by a long way for the people out there - though it's not just them on the line!). The less good treatment of Dagenham and Woodford shouldn't mean that Northwood should be brought down - ideally the far ends of the District, Central, Piccadilly, etc would get trains that better suit them - it's the problem of the tube being metro and S-bahn at the same time. To say "tough, other people put up with it" is a bit like Ed Balls' schools policy which is pretty much that there should be no winners unless everyone can win, therefore we should all be losers.

I don't really agree with that analogy. How is the seating on the S Stock making everyone a loser? It's a case of priorities. The fewer seats allows more people to fit in during the peaks, shorter dwell times, which is where it matters. There's the people that can't physically fit on southbound Met trains at Wembley Park and Finchley Road probably will be able to now the S Stock is in service, versus the seated passengers who will now have to stand because of fewer seats.

The gap between Finchely Road and Baker Street has equivalents - Kings Cross to Caledonian Road and Highbury and Islington are about as far. The Central, Piccadilly and Victoria lines all have fast bits, even if there's no slow lines on some of them: Liverpool St - Stratford - see how many stops the District has going out to West Ham, Kings Cross - Seven Sisters, Earls Court - Acton Town. Are they equivalent - not quite, but still.

True, but the Metropolitan still wins in this respect. Huge gaps between Moor Park - Harrow-on-the-Hill, Wembley Park - Finchley Road, etc etc. And not forgetting that there is the even faster Chiltern services, or the slower Jubilee services, you could even say the Bakerloo/Central/Piccadilly lines offer alternatives too. Met passengers are spoiled for choice.

sotonsi

August 6th, 2010, 12:58 PM

There might be an uproar if the Piccadilly/Central had lots of seating in the first place, but AFAIK, they never have.They did when they were BR branches (OK, not Cockfosters), but then they gained a better service when they switched (which doesn't happen with the Met). These commuters have my sympathy too - it comes from over-extending the tube lines with their small trains. Yes, it was the easiest way to deal with getting to those places, but as those villages grow bigger and the people did too, it's made the inner areas pay badly with overcrowding. However, of course, almost no one is old enough to know what it was once like on trains with proper seats - with Northwood the change has happened now, so they aren't used to it and they don't get the benefit of going through a central London tube (or further than Baker Street - Watford morning trains stop there). At Pinner, it doesn't make much difference that S stock has more seats than tube stocks, what matters is that five or ten people got seats under A stock, and none of them will now.

The comparison with A stock is the only comparison needed to see if it is a reduction of quality of service - the answer is yes, when it comes to seats. The comparisons with elsewhere (and Eltham, Seven Kings, Twickenham, etc should be made as well as Woodford, Dagenham Heathway, etc) are only really relevant to see if they are now so short-changed by the S-stock that it was a mistake. No - it drops the Met line to somewhere between tube and NR, which is what it is (in LUL colours).
That's why i'm unsympathetic as the S Stock still has more seats than most of the existing LU lines.You are unsympathetic as you hate people having it good - as I said, lowest common denominator as you hate the idea of someone winning (especially if they are suburbanites).
The Tube will always win as it goes direct into Central London... But I don't see why they should be compared as they are inherently completely different services.What BR and the met shouldn't be compared, or Epping and the Met? Baker Street is further from Central London than pretty much every London terminus! OK, Watford trains (which have the Northwood problem which is what this about), and other peak trains do to the northern Circle, so they do get Central London - but my point is that they got them with A stock - the service on the outer parts of the Met is downgraded by the design of the new trains running on it. The inner part is improved though.

When Epping et all got downgraded to crappy longitudinal seating it got a huge upgrade in service - more penetration of the City for a start. Now the Met line is being downgraded to half-longitudinal seating, what are they getting - new trains, that go about as fast as the old ones used to, at a slightly better frequency. For those at the southern end of getting seats in the morning there's a huge retrograde step - just because every other tube line has it worse doesn't negate that. Should LUL be coddling the Metroland folks - no! Is there a valid complaint - yes!
I don't really agree with that analogy. How is the seating on the S Stock making everyone a loser?It's a drag down to the losers (when it comes to stock) policy that you are operating - you go "others have it worse" and instead of going "and they should have it better", you go "boo hoo for you - I'm going to ignore your complaint because I have a grudge against how well you have been, and will be, treated by LUL - in fact, you should have it much worse - even S stock is too good for you and your fast service with few stops in zones 2-4".It's a case of priorities.Indeed, hence why I agree with S stock replacing A stock - some people are going to lose.The fewer seats allows more people to fit in during the peaks, shorter dwell times, which is where it matters. There's the people that can't physically fit on southbound Met trains at Wembley Park and Finchley Road probably will be able to now the S Stock is in service, versus the seated passengers who will now have to stand because of fewer seats.

True, but the Metropolitan still wins in this respect. Huge gaps between Moor Park - Harrow-on-the-Hill, Wembley Park - Finchley Road, etc etc. And not forgetting that there is the even faster Chiltern services, or the slower Jubilee services, you could even say the Bakerloo/Central/Piccadilly lines offer alternatives too. Met passengers are spoiled for choice.Not from Northwood (though they can change at Wembley Park or Harrow, I guess). The fast trains to Moor Park are effectively LUL run main line commuter services (something which you deny - the BR-esque nature of the line, emphasised these past 50 years by A stock being designed for outer commuters). It's interesting how your argument relies on there being nothing special or different about the Met line then you keep pushing for this difference. Interesting that you talk about not being able to get on at Wembley Park or Finchely Road (surely quite a few get off here?) and then talk about how much choice there is for Met line customers - there's a choice for both these stations all the way in (that doesn't mean we shouldn't have it that they can't use the Met) - there isn't for the small area of the Met where S stock will have a genuine negative effect.

What I am saying is that there is there is a real negative effect of A stock being replaced by S stock - on a small bit of the Met line and greatly outweighed by the benefits. The people of Northwood have a valid complaint - they are seriously dis-benefited by this change - they do not gain, they lose and lose a lot. There's other issues that I have with your view of the world, iampuking, that prejudices you and blinds you to see my point, but I really have one point and one point alone that I'm trying to say and it is nice and bold for people to see.

Should S stock on the Met be scrapped for them? No - it's great for those from Harrow southwards and not the end of the world for Northwood people. S stock rectifies the decision in the late 50s to have A stock be mostly for the North of Harrow commuter - this is compromise between the inner and outer sections.

Should we try and work a way to improve the people of Northwood's lot? Perhaps - Crossrail's Aylesbury branch plan closed Moor Park's fast line platforms and replaced them with Northwood ones - far better catchment area for the fast line stop. It doesn't look easy, but also not very hard to do, and if LUL are clever they will just have it as an unfunded plan for years or something as a sort of sop for making the people of Northwood stand.

makita09

August 6th, 2010, 03:26 PM

Interesting. I can see why they're disappointed, but I agree its a case of priorities. As someone who had to stand all the way commuting from Sevenoaks every day my sympathy is somewhat muted.

Its Britain. We like a good old moan.

Indeed, I think its our most superior characteristic :) Apart from thinking a cup of tea is the solution to everything.

kerouac1848

August 6th, 2010, 08:33 PM

Sotonsi

I'm sorry, but you're exaggerting about the disadvantages of the the S stock.

However, of course, almost no one is old enough to know what it was once like on trains with proper seats - with Northwood the change has happened now, so they aren't used to it and they don't get the benefit of going through a central London tube (or further than Baker Street - Watford morning trains stop there). At Pinner, it doesn't make much difference that S stock has more seats than tube stocks, what matters is that five or ten people got seats under A stock, and none of them will now.

You're forgetting one important point; the train starts at watford and is empty. Northwood is only the 4th stop and those there and before can monopolise seats. With over 300 seats and walkthrough carriages that won't be an issue for Northwood, never mind Watford. The people most likely to have less seats than before are those at Harrow-on-around and stops near (yes, there are sometimes seats available when a train rolls in). Most people in Watford don't use the met line station anyway (except those in West watford, which is less populated anyway) as it isn't in the town's centre and gets into London slower than fast services from Watford Junction (which is a major stop).

Baker Street is further from Central London than pretty much every London terminus! OK, Watford trains (which have the Northwood problem which is what this about), and other peak trains do to the northern Circle, so they do get Central London - but my point is that they got them with A stock - the service on the outer parts of the Met is downgraded by the design of the new trains running on it. The inner part is improved though.

Wtf?! Baker st. is IN central London. If you mean the City, than Paddington is further and the interchange longer and more hassle (Ditto Victoria). Anyone who’s lived close to a met line station (like I have. Indeed I grew up using the line) would change at either Harrow-on-the-Hill or Finchley Rd for an Aldgate train ( around half the trains in peak-hours go through to Aldgate); to do so at baker st. is stupid. Similarly, they have cross platform interchange at Finchley for the Jubilee line, taking them to the West End and CW.

Now the Met line is being downgraded to half-longitudinal seating, what are they getting - new trains, that go about as fast as the old ones used to, at a slightly better frequency. For those at the southern end of getting seats in the morning there's a huge retrograde step - just because every other tube line has it worse doesn't negate that.

The new trains have much faster acceleration and breakage, reducing total journey times. That is a huge improvement trust me and hardly a retrograde step. One thing I always hated about the met line was how slow the train would enter and leave the platform (at Wembley this is made more notable because you could compare it to the jubilee trains). Also note that this isn't just with regards to stations; trains stop frequently due to bunch ups caused by flat junctions in the central area. Finally, they'll undoubtedly be much smoother than the A stock, and bumpy rides can be an issue (around moor park and Wembley to Neasden especially).

What I am saying is that there is there is a real negative effect of A stock being replaced by S stock - on a small bit of the Met line and greatly outweighed by the benefits. The people of Northwood have a valid complaint - they are seriously dis-benefited by this change - they do not gain, they lose and lose a lot. There's other issues that I have with your view of the world, iampuking, that prejudices you and blinds you to see my point, but I really have one point and one point alone that I'm trying to say and it is nice and bold for people to see.

Bollocks. They still keep the advantage of having first priority of seats, together with trains which can start and stop much quicker, leading to reduced journey times and better frequency, as well as being more comfortable. The A Stocks layout meant journeys for people from Harrow southwards were poor; hot, crowded, awarked and essentially unacceptable.

You're deliberatly playing down the benefits whilst bigging up disadvantages which when looked at properly are minor at best.

makita09

August 6th, 2010, 10:35 PM

You're forgetting one important point; the train starts at watford and is empty. Northwood is only the 4th stop and those there and before can monopolise seats. With over 300 seats and walkthrough carriages that won't be an issue for Northwood, never mind Watford. The people most likely to have less seats than before are those at Harrow-on-around and stops near (yes, there are sometimes seats available when a train rolls in). Most people in Watford don't use the met line station anyway (except those in West watford, which is less populated anyway) as it isn't in the town's centre and gets into London slower than fast services from Watford Junction (which is a major stop).

Of course this doesn't help in the evening, when no one has a geographically-provided advantage over the seats and everyone has equal chance of getting one. But that'll be at worst part of the journey, as from what you say loadings decrease significantly, and anyone standing will get a seat at some point if they are heading further out.

future.architect

August 6th, 2010, 11:00 PM

This debate about seats is just like the one we are having in manchester. The old trams have 86 seats, the new ones have 52 + 8 perch seats. One of the actual reasons is tougher regulations, you need to have more space for pushchairs ect.

In manchester the old trams will be refurbished over the next 4/5 years and will have the seating layout changed to match the new ones.

allurban

August 6th, 2010, 11:46 PM

Did something happen on the DLR yesterday at Island Gardens station?

My wife & I walked out the of the Thames footpath around 3:30 or 4pm to see 8 fire engines sitting in front of Island Gardens with red and white tape across the entrance.

By the time we got to the next station (Mudchute) we could see the LED signs saying that service was suspended in both directions and a number of police & ambulances were roaring past with lights on and sirens up.

By the time we got to the new South Quay station we saw a train operating so I guess things were back to normal.

Cheers, m

by the way, it's interesting that they moved South Quay station and dismantled the old station as well...can't say that I've ever seen a station dismantled before - and presumably they did it without disrupting the DLR service?

iampuking

August 7th, 2010, 05:32 AM

I can't be bothered to reply to everyone's replies. I just want to say a few things.

Sotonsi, it's really cute that you remember my post history enough to know my dislike of the suburbs (funnily enough I dislike the new Arcade Fire album called The Suburbs when I liked all their others...) but i'm not a moron enough to be so biased that I can't see their viewpoint. If my views were so skewed then why do two other posters seem to agree with me? And it seems you agree with me too, the new S Stock benefits a greater percentage of people than it disbenefits.

One point I'd like to add is that the new S Stock allows far greater capacity on the northern sections of the circle in the peaks, it seems such a waste to have these BR style trains with huge amounts of seating running in between high capacity C Stock trains... And I can assure you as a past user of the Met from Finchley Road, very few people get off and the trains are often too full to board.

Tubeman

August 7th, 2010, 11:26 AM

PortoNuts

August 8th, 2010, 02:02 AM

The A Stock now really seems kind of archaic next to the S Stock. :lol:

New S Stock racing with the A Stock.

fGFm6oVOfTw

mtj73

August 8th, 2010, 08:28 AM

The A Stock now really seems kind of archaic next to the S Stock. :lol:

It is archaic, 50 years old. I take my hat off to the guys that built them and most importantly the guys that keep them running every day.

By pure chance I happened to see an old steam train at Brisbane Central station yesterday, the tanoy proudly anounces that the engine was built in 1950 and the steel carridges in 1960s. A60 stock popped up in my head an had silent chuckle, other cities are use younger trains as heritage novelties than LU are using for main service.

poshbakerloo

August 8th, 2010, 05:35 PM

I don't what the big deal is with the seats. Do people really travel Amersham-Aldgate!?
I'd imagine most change at Baker Street etc

sweek

August 8th, 2010, 05:48 PM

People who really do travel those long distances will still find seats. I expect there will be seats available between Amersham/Chesham/Uxbridge and Harrow-on-the-Hill at least, with the standing spaces being used from Harrow southwards.
The frequency is going to be higher on the Uxbridge branch, too.

PortoNuts

August 8th, 2010, 09:05 PM

It is archaic, 50 years old. I take my hat off to the guys that built them and most importantly the guys that keep them running every day.

It's indeed astonishing how they managed to keep these trains running for so long. They must be rock solid quality as they were built 'back then'.

poshbakerloo

August 8th, 2010, 09:57 PM

It's indeed astonishing how they managed to keep these trains running for so long. They must be rock solid quality as they were built 'back then'.

Yeah they where. They have been real refurbished. I see the HSTs running until their 50 aswell!

Tubeman

August 9th, 2010, 09:48 PM

It's indeed astonishing how they managed to keep these trains running for so long. They must be rock solid quality as they were built 'back then'.

Provided the bodies and bogies are soundly manufactured, you can keep on replacing smaller parts indefinitely (or at least as long as you can still source them). Don't forget the LU 1938 Stock is still operating on the Isle of Wight, 72 years old!

The generation of trains that the A60 stock belongs to are very simple: all air pipes, simple circuits and chunky fuses. A lot of train equipment was able to be cannibalised when the very similar (mechanically) 1959 & 1962 stocks were withdrawn in the 1990's so there's plenty of spares still.

I'll mourn the passing of the A60, as they're the last of the 2-handed trains (separate 'master control' and brake handle), and the cabs are very similar to the 1959 stock trains I started off driving on the Northern Line (although far bigger of course!), so I find them quite evocative. The end of an era :(

The one thing I won't miss is the horrific creaking and banging from the 'metalastic' suspension... The 1959 stock trains were equally bad in this regard. The suspension between the bogies and car bodies is made up of alternating layers of rubber and steel which can make some quite alarming noises as the car bodies rock from side to side, which when I was a Guard would result in accusing and sometimes frightened looks from passengers...