2024 Tube Stock (Siemens Inspiro London)

[TRAX]

Today, Siemens’ social media accounts have presented the final design of the new Piccadilly line tube trains.



Here is the press release with a lot of information and a few pictures, outside and inside: https://www.mobility.siemens.com/gl...nces/metro-london.html?linkId=300000000971683

As well as a datasheet with some technical information: https://assets.new.siemens.com/siem...mobility-piccadilly-line-tube-brochure-en.pdf

 

[Royston Vasey]

Those little square windows remind me very much of the Class 487!

 

[TRAX]

Indeed !

 

[JaJaWa]

So Siemens solved deep tube AC by... putting it under the train?

 

[J-2739]

You'd think it would be claustrophobic, looking at that exterior, but it's actually light and airy inside.

 

[Sad Sprinter]

Alarmingly agreeable, was expecting something awful

 

[TRAX]

So Siemens solved deep tube AC by... putting it under the train?

Yes, this has always been the plan. There’s no room on the roof to put it, unless you’re willing to put it under the roof, thus protruding on the inside of each car which is not really a great idea.

 

[Non Multi]

So there's going to be LCD panels for video advertising and travel information throughout.

 

[Mag_seven]

So Siemens solved deep tube AC by... putting it under the train?

Yes, this has always been the plan. There’s no room on the roof to put it, unless you’re willing to put it under the roof, thus protruding on the inside of each car which is not really a great idea.

For years we were told that deep tube AC wasn't possible.

 

[JaJaWa]

For years we were told that deep tube AC wasn't possible.

Yes Ken Livingstone once launched a competition for ideas on how to add AC to the deep tube. There were no winners, but the favourite idea was adding heat packs to the end cars that would be swapped with cold ones at the terminal stations

 

[py_megapixel]

Those windows look almost aircraft-sized. Hope it isn't too claustrophobic inside...

That said, the Victoria line trains also have very small windows and they don't feel too bad

 

[TRAX]

For years we were told that deep tube AC wasn't possible.

Indeed, but maybe A/C packs got more compact as progress was made in the technology.

 

[Journeyman]

There's a lot of subtle vintage design cues in this that I really like. There's more than a hint of the best parts of the 1938/59/62 stocks in there.

 

[LOL The Irony]

There's more than a hint of the best parts of the 1938/59/62 stocks in there.

Hasn't every subsequent deep level tube been based off the 1938 stock in one way or another though?

 

[TRAX]

Hasn't every subsequent deep level tube been based off the 1938 stock in one way or another though?

Aesthetically speaking, I don’t find.

From what I can see in the pictures (and it’s actually written in the datasheet), the Inspiro London does have some design elements inspired by the Underground’s "heritage" (quoted from said datasheet, linked in post #1).

 

[MotCO]

I assume that the articulated bogies means that there are fewer wheels under each carriage which therefore provides the room for the A/C equipment.

Looking at the pictures, are there any luggage areas? Have these been sacrificed to provide the greater capacity?

Edit: to correct my lousy spelling!

 

[TRAX]

I assume that the articulated bogies means that there are feww=er wheels under each carriage which therefore provides the room for the A/C equipment.

Yes it does mean that there are two axles per car.

 

[Journeyman]

Hasn't every subsequent deep level tube been based off the 1938 stock in one way or another though?

Sort of, but from the 67 Stock onwards it got progressively harder to find, visually at least.

From what I can see in the pictures (and it’s actually written in the datasheet), the Inspiro London does have some design elements inspired by the Underground’s "heritage" (quoted from said datasheet, linked in post #1).

Exactly, that's what I was getting at - the square windows in particular.

 

[TRAX]

The body shape is also taken from the 1995/1996 stocks, rather than the more recent 2009 stock, which itself had a shape based on the even older 1992 stock.

I like when a modern design takes hints from previous designs, refreshing it rather than revolutionising it.

 

[Journeyman]

The body shape is also taken from the 1995/1996 stocks, rather than the more recent 2009 stock, which itself had a shape based on the even older 1992 stock.

I like when a modern design takes hints from previous designs, refreshing it rather than revolutionising it.

The 2009 Stock is bigger than the 1992 Stock though - it was designed to take advantage of slightly bigger tunnels on the Victoria line, and it won't fit anywhere else. The 95/96 profile is a bit more standard, hence its reuse.

 

[TRAX]

The 2009 Stock is bigger than the 1992 Stock though - it was designed to take advantage of slightly bigger tunnels on the Victoria line, and it won't fit anywhere else. The 95/96 profile is a bit more standard, hence its reuse.

Yes but I was just talking about the shape itself.

 

[Journeyman]

Yes but I was just talking about the shape itself.

True, they're pretty similar. I rather like the 92 Stock myself, although I don't think that's a popular opinion!

 

[TRAX]

True, they're pretty similar. I rather like the 92 Stock myself, although I don't think that's a popular opinion!

I do enjoy them quite a lot, although the motors are too quiet for my liking (I know, I know).

 

[Taunton]

Why externally hung doors ? With a given width that means the whole of the saloon is narrower than it might otherwise be.

The mouse-sized windows will be a real claustrophobia with such a high proportion of the passengers standing. Will station signs be altered to be at the bottom of the backwalls rather than above people's heads as at present - because that's the only bit you will be able to see.

I notice the number of seats is never stated nowadays. I know the trend at TfL is to make everyone stand, because they think nobody does long journeys on the Tube (oh, apart from say Kings Cross to Heathrow T5; remind me which Tube line these trains are first for), but there's nothing to stop publishing how many seats there are, so we can make a comparison.

And while speaking about Heathrow, does the 1,076 passengers figure allow for all those going to the airport with rollaboard suitcases, or has provision and space for those been conveniently forgotten.

And a serious engineering point, I'm surprised they state that it has a "track friendly, multi articulated design". Because I'm sure a proposal in the past for articulated stock on the main line was squelched by Network Rail noting that the axle load is greater if you have effectively one axle at each end of a coach, instead of two, and as they had found track costs were proportional to axle load, they were going to charge much more for them.

 

[TRAX]

Why externally hung doors ? With a given width that means the whole of the saloon is narrower than it might otherwise be.

The mouse-sized windows will be a real claustrophobia with such a high proportion of the passengers standing. Will station signs be altered to be at the bottom of the backwalls rather than above people's heads as at present - because that's the only bit you will be able to see.

I notice the number of seats is never stated nowadays. I know the trend at TfL is to make everyone stand, because they think nobody does long journeys on the Tube (oh, apart from say Kings Cross to Heathrow T5; remind me which Tube line these trains are first for), but there's nothing to stop publishing how many seats there are, so we can make a comparison.

And while speaking about Heathrow, does the 1,076 passengers figure allow for all those going to the airport with rollaboard suitcases, or has provision and space for those been conveniently forgotten.

And a serious engineering point, I'm surprised they state that it has a "track friendly, multi articulated design". Because I'm sure a proposal in the past for articulated stock on the main line was squelched by Network Rail noting that the axle load is greater if you have effectively one axle at each end of a coach, instead of two, and as they had found track costs were proportional to axle load, they were going to charge much more for them.

The windows are not as wide, but they're the same height as on other stock, no ?

Network Rail doesn't do LU though, so it might be a case of how LU considers axle loads and if there is a charging system at all as on the national rail network.

 

[MatthewRead]

Hope they arrive before 2025 I want those old trains gone!

 

[Domh245]

Why externally hung doors ? With a given width that means the whole of the saloon is narrower than it might otherwise be.

Seeing as all tube stock has been externally hung since 92, there's clearly something to it! Whilst you cannot notionally have as wide a train as with pocket doors, the saloon space (the important bit) is much thinner because there's only the one 'wall' rather than 2

but there's nothing to stop publishing how many seats there are, so we can make a comparison.

Indeed there isn't - so they did. 268 seats (vs 228 on a 1973TS)

And while speaking about Heathrow, does the 1,076 passengers figure allow for all those going to the airport with rollaboard suitcases, or has provision and space for those been conveniently forgotten.

The 1076 (808 of which standing) looks to be based a 5pax/m2 loading and floor space - quite obviously said capacity won't be achieved when heathrow travellers are out in force (just as 73TS crush loads aren't achieved now with Heathrow travellers in the mix). There doesn't look to be dedicated airport traveller space, but the wheelchair areas will no doubt be able to provide a lot of that functionality without taking away precious seats from everyone else the rest of the time!

The windows are not as wide, but they're the same height as on other stock, no ?

They look to be similar height to more recent stock, though possibly slightly shorter than 73TS. The station nameboard visibility is a bit of a moot point anyway with the internal audio-visual announcements anyway I'd have thought

Network Rail doesn't do LU though, so it might be a case of how LU considers axle loads and if there is a charging system at all as on the national rail network.

The laws of physics remain the same though (higher load = higher wear) - though perhaps the other key factor of speed means it's much less of an issue. The overall weight reduction is also important, and indeed is probably more significant on a lightweight metro train vs a 'full-fat' one. A 1.5t bogie is more of a significant weight saving when the vehicles themselves are lighter

The most surprising thing I took away was the 100kph top speed - only the Met gets up to that speed out in the sticks - don't think they do that on the Uxbridge branch (though obviously the possibility is now there!)

 

[TRAX]

The most surprising thing I took away was the 100kph top speed - only the Met gets up to that speed out in the sticks - don't think they do that on the Uxbridge branch (though obviously the possibility is now there!)

Doesn't the Jubilee Line reach 90 kph out east ? Not that these trains will ever go on the Jub'...

I believe the Central Line has open sections at 100 kph, restricted to 85 for the 1992 Stock after the Chancery Lane derailment, and the NTFL will run on this line (if the option is taken up), so maybe that's why ?

 

[rebmcr]

And a serious engineering point, I'm surprised they state that it has a "track friendly, multi articulated design". Because I'm sure a proposal in the past for articulated stock on the main line was squelched by Network Rail noting that the axle load is greater if you have effectively one axle at each end of a coach, instead of two, and as they had found track costs were proportional to axle load, they were going to charge much more for them.

Have you failed to notice the statement about 9-car trains, where the current 1973 Tube Stock maxes-out platform lengths with only 6 cars?

20 axles* is not a vast reduction from 24 (and for all we know the total train weight might well be lower too), but articulation is far far gentler when trying to avoid track wear on corners.

*22 axles if these are configured as half-train units, despite having no cabs in the middle, just like S Stock

 

[Vindaloo 42]

And a serious engineering point, I'm surprised they state that it has a "track friendly, multi articulated design". Because I'm sure a proposal in the past for articulated stock on the main line was squelched by Network Rail noting that the axle load is greater if you have effectively one axle at each end of a coach, instead of two, and as they had found track costs were proportional to axle load, they were going to charge much more for them.

If Network Rail are against articulated stock, then explain the new Greater Anglia FLIRTs?

Articulated axles are only heavy if they have traction equipment hanging from them, as trailer axles they're comparatively light footed.

The GA FLIRTs uses a mixture of bogie (for motor cars) and articulated (for trailer cars), see https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/u...8558.jpg.b793be01c2667d2f4db575a93b988bb4.jpg

I'm a simple man, if Siemens are reading this, all I ask is for an interior *not* derived from the Class 700!