The_Engineer
Member
- Joined
- 24 Mar 2018
- Messages
- 524
Brilliant news!22 UK based manufacturers to supply components.
Brilliant news!22 UK based manufacturers to supply components.
Whatever the issues with electrification at the moment, I can't see Chiltern not progressing without some sort of electrification to at least remove DMUs from Marylebone and Birmingham.
The 1992 Tube Stock is pretty awful and always has been. They have so far needed all the car ends rebuilt/replaced and the bogies replaced and next the traction equipment is being replaced.
The amount of shared Met/Chiltern track is fairly limited: just between Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham. So it's probably not worth the effort of getting diesel/DC bi-modes just for that.If we're lucky, any 165 replacement will be required to be bi-modal with LU's 4th rail supply but I don't think we'll see any knitting going up.
the next chiltern franchise will probably [have] no real private investment in infrastructure, so any electrification will be Network Rail's responsibility
That seems to be the opposite of DfT policy announcements as of late, with more emphasis being placed on dedicated infrastructure teams tying into each franchise, alongside more privately-run infrastructure projects.
And as far as I can tell, the privately run infrastructure projects still require them to fund it
If the Alstom merger goes ahead could see them built in Widnes instead.Yes they'll be Yorkshire built trains.
https://www.globalrailnews.com/2018...contract-to-build-new-generation-tube-trains/
The Bakerloo Line 72 stock is only a year or two older than the Piccadilly Line 73 stock (albeit to an older design). And operates on a far less important line.As a regular traveller on the Tube, I must say I'm quite surprised the Piccadilly Line trains will be the first to be replaced, when personally I think the Bakerloo should've been first. The Bakerloo and Piccadilly trains are pretty much the same age, yet the Bakerloo feels so much older in comparison. Even the Central Line despite being years younger is pretty bad in my opinion.
I'll admit that is true, as the Piccadilly is essentially the airport and tourist line, and there are many alternative lines at the stations the Bakerloo line serves, but I do wonder how much longer we'll have to put up with the 72 stock.
Question for the Bakerloo though. I know there is grandfather rights and all, but will health and safety or disability law have an issue with the Watford DC line step down once a new fleet comes in? I can't see it being acceptable much longer.
The need to have trains of two different floor heights serving separate destinations on tube and mainline routes dictates that on one or both of the train-platform interfaces, there will be accessability issues. Providing suitable signage is given along all affected routes, the arrangements probably qualify for exemption from absolute PRM compliance. Given that duplicating platforms along the route from Kensal Green north-westwards would be prohibitively expensive, the only way to be compliant would be to terminate all Bakerloo trains at Queens Park, - politically in the 'very difficult' basket!... Question for the Bakerloo though. I know there is grandfather rights and all, but will health and safety or disability law have an issue with the Watford DC line step down once a new fleet comes in? I can't see it being acceptable much longer. ...
Yorkshire built bodyshells?Yes they'll be Yorkshire built trains.
https://www.globalrailnews.com/2018...contract-to-build-new-generation-tube-trains/
They decided after a review a couple of years back to life extend the Bakerloo trains (a smaller fleet so lower cost to steelwork repairs) to allow the Piccadilly replacement to sort of jump the queue...As a regular traveller on the Tube, I must say I'm quite surprised the Piccadilly Line trains will be the first to be replaced, when personally I think the Bakerloo should've been first. The Bakerloo and Piccadilly trains are pretty much the same age, yet the Bakerloo feels so much older in comparison. Even the Central Line despite being years younger is pretty bad in my opinion.
They decided after a review a couple of years back to life extend the Bakerloo trains (a smaller fleet so lower cost to steelwork repairs) to allow the Piccadilly replacement to sort of jump the queue...
Oh right, that makes sense. Response to a bit of an emergency that had to be dealt with ‘now’ effectively allowed change of the priorities as a side effect?The Railengineer article on it has it a different way around - the 72TS needed urgent body repairs to remain in service in the short term (there was no chance of getting the new fleet delivered before they became unsafe), and as TfL were investing in restoring the body to a "as-new" condition and giving them a prolonged life, it made sense to go a little bit further and make them RVAR compliant and replace them after the 73TS (and 92TS). Fleet size didn't really come into it.
The Railengineer article on it has it a different way around - the 72TS needed urgent body repairs to remain in service in the short term (there was no chance of getting the new fleet delivered before they became unsafe)...
Will the Bakerloo line sets keep the bays of seating? I know they're the only deep tube stock that has it but as the Bakerloo always seems relatively quiet surely it would encourage people to travel, as it's much more comfortable and better for groups. An S-8 style layout could make sense.
Same issues with the picc ond met out to uxbridge, the law says that what is reasonable must be done, spending tens of millions or more would not be considered reasonableI'm happy. Not travelled on a Siemens Metro but I'd expect very good quality. Great for Yorkshire.
Question for the Bakerloo though. I know there is grandfather rights and all, but will health and safety or disability law have an issue with the Watford DC line step down once a new fleet comes in? I can't see it being acceptable much longer.
Will the new trains have bays as well?It's a bare minimum refurbishment, all of the bays remain apart from the designated trailer cars where the bay on one side will be removed to create a wheelchair space.
Will the new trains have bays as well?
About 3/4 years?
Interesting that the Railway Technology Magazine displays this photo of another design of train:
I guess this was Hitachi's design.
The 1972 stock fleet is currently going through a program to modify the trains for compliance post 2020, with an expectation that they'll last until 2030
The need to have trains of two different floor heights serving separate destinations on tube and mainline routes dictates that on one or both of the train-platform interfaces, there will be accessability issues. Providing suitable signage is given along all affected routes, the arranghements probably qualify for exemption from absolute PRM compliance. Given that duplicating platforms along the route from Kensal Green north-westwards would be prohibitively expensive, the only way to be compliant would be to terminate all Bakerloo trains at Queens Park, - politically in the 'very difficult' basket!
Same issues with the picc ond met out to uxbridge, the law says that what is reasonable must be done, spending tens of millions or more would not be considered reasonable
Isn't that compliance is meaningless and a total waste of money if the only stations on the Bakerloo which are step free, aren't step free for the Bakerloo?
The main elements that will be installed are the wheelchair spaces (which will be in the trailer car of the three car unit), and an audio/visual passenger information system. The biggest challenge of all is the gap between the train and the platform. LU’s practice on other lines is to use a mixture of platform humps and manual boarding ramps depending on the curvature and other factors. For the Bakerloo, LU has agreed with the DfT that no boarding aids will be provided where there is no interchange and no foreseeable prospect of providing street to platform step free access.
Competition for the contract will no doubt have been fierce, not least because the potential value of it beyond the Piccadilly line stock is huge. The total Deep Tube requirement is closer to 250 trains, making the run-on orders for the other lines a very attractive prospect indeed. It’s not just the manufacture either – this contract covers fleet maintenance too.