1992 stock Refurbishment?

[Blindtraveler]

To wordy
But still very good

 

[notverydeep]

This morning, the CLIP train operated train 132 (Timetable Notice 99/24) this morning peak 08:17 from Ruislip Gardens to Grange Hill (via Woodford) with 91001 leading. This is the first time it has operated in passenger service through Central London tunnel section

 

[xtmw]

It was also operating last night through the pipe

 

[branny_rail465]

I did examine the Bombardier Mitrac system before posting as it was mentioned earlier in this thread.

But the Bombardier Mitrac seems to be a very generic name for its propulsion system and includes both asynchronous (induction) motors and the newer PMSMs.

For example, in this conference publication, on page 13, Bombardier lists the MITRAC TM 3700F as an "air cooled, three phase asynchronous motor"

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/561e6ed5e4b039248a6a94aa/t/565f6971e4b0860912bcf10c/1449093489348/ALP-45DP+Locomotie+Paper-2008.pdf

While in this presentation, Bombardier explains their new (at that time) MITRAC PM motors, with slide 9 listing some ongoing projects (at that time).

http://www.gronataget.se/upload/PM%20motors%20for%20railway%20applications.pdf

From wiki, the S stock uses asynchronous (induction) motors. However, they are already more than 10 years old, so I was wondering if the 1992 stock uses the newer PMSM technology.

induction motors have been around for decades and upgraded over time. Its likely got devloped induction motors, developed meaning up to date with modern day standards.

Although it must be said that it doesn't sound a bit like the 2009 stock (the sound of which I usually describe as like an Electrostar on steroids). It is an almost identical sound to the S Stock taking off though.

Its that and then some. It has a destinct noise seperate from both electrostars amd S stock. It funnily enough, still sounds like a washing machine but a modern one. At least it sounds like mine. The deep groaning sounds it makes.

 

[branny_rail465]

Because the trains have a habit of shaking themselves apart. 100kph running was highlighted as one of the things leading to the Chancery Lane derailment motor working itself loose and falling off.

Thats not exactly true. If they have new bogies and motors then it will likely be secure. The 92 stock derailed partly because it had poorly fitted motors mounted to the wheel axle. At least thats what was said. Modern trains have frame mounted bogies for the most part and the central line derailment is unlikely to happen again on given modern understanding of issues like this. At least they could be allowed to run at those speeds on the suburban side of the route

 

[100andthirty]

Thats not exactly true. If they have new bogies and motors then it will likely be secure. The 92 stock derailed partly because it had poorly fitted motors mounted to the wheel axle. At least thats what was said. Modern trains have frame mounted bogies for the most part and the central line derailment is unlikely to happen again on given modern understanding of issues like this. At least they could be allowed to run at those speeds on the suburban side of the route

The accident at Chancery Lane occurred because the frame mounted motor came away from its bogie frame mount and fell on the track. The train ran over it and derailed. The frame to motor mount design wasn't fit for purpose and on analysis, it was found that the bogie fram mounting wasn't either. Some had started to crack after just 10 years service. As a result, LU replaced all the bogie frames and this included a new way of mouning the motors to the frame. The motor mount arrangement has been carried over to the new motors.

The last LU fleet with 'wheel axle' mounted motors (which are also supported on the bogie frame) was the 1983 tube stock and (for completeness) the 4-car 1986 tube stock Blue train.

 

[xtmw]

There's been talk of 100kph running once every train has been refurbished but nothing has been confirmed

 

[branny_rail465]

The accident at Chancery Lane occurred because the frame mounted motor came away from its bogie frame mount and fell on the track. The train ran over it and derailed. The frame to motor mount design wasn't fit for purpose and on analysis, it was found that the bogie fram mounting wasn't either. Some had started to crack after just 10 years service. As a result, LU replaced all the bogie frames and this included a new way of mouning the motors to the frame. The motor mount arrangement has been carried over to the new motors.

The last LU fleet with 'wheel axle' mounted motors (which are also supported on the bogie frame) was the 1983 tube stock and (for completeness) the 4-car 1986 tube stock Blue train.

Ah okay, i assumed they were also axle mounted. But i got my info mixed up. But yeah this makes sense. The motor is likely going to be fine at 60mph on the right length of track . Otherwise you would never have s stock or 96 stock trains going near their max speed

There's been talk of 100kph running once every train has been refurbished but nothing has been confirmed

Lets see. ;^) but rumours do be rumouring

 

[xtmw]

It wouldn't be impossible to do this, the signalling can handle it just fine. However the decision lies with management providing it would pass it 'checks' however it may just be chatter and there might just be 0 plans to reinstate 100kph running.

 

[Nym]

Restoring 100km/h was being discussed in the project offices even so back as far as the Kawasaki bogies being replaced, but the motors are pretty much the last “weak” link stopping it

 

[xtmw]

Restoring 100km/h was being discussed in the project offices even so back as far as the Kawasaki bogies being replaced, but the motors are pretty much the last “weak” link stopping it

Am I right in saying the Kawasaki bogies were fully replaced in late 2012/2013 ?

 

[Nym]

Am I right in saying the Kawasaki bogies were fully replaced in late 2012/2013 ?

Sounds right, but I’ve definately slept since then so don’t hold me to it

 

[xtmw]

100kph running isn't unheard of - I've definitely heard drivers going above 85kph in CM between THB and DEB. It's supposed to be prohibited but some drivers like to risk it...

 

[Recessio]

Would 100kph make much difference to the service levels? If it is worth doing, surely it would be done as part of CLIP?

 

[xtmw]

100kph running won't be happening until all the trains are refurbished

 

[RacsoMoquette]

April 2024: Is the CLIPED unit operating regularly between Ruislip Gardens and Woodford via Hainult? Or is it just peak hours or on weekdays? Any news of other refurbished units entering service in the near future? And how long do we estimate until the unit performs full end to end service on the mainline?

 

[xtmw]

It's running between Ruislip and Hainaul depots this week and has been for a few weeks now. It's up to the controllers wether they'll run it via Woodford or via Hainault. CLIP train #2 may be finished by December. (It was supposed to be done by August!). CLIP train #1 is running into some technical issues but nothing which is bad.
Indeed it became defective yesterday and had to be sent back to Ruislip depot. It returned to service by lunchtime. No word yet on when it'll be performing services 'end-to-end'

 

[Nym]

Train #1 was supposed to be done by 2017…(!)

 

[xtmw]

Think this can win the award of the most extensive & delayed refurbishment project on LU !

 

[Goldfish62]

Think this can win the award of the most extensive & delayed refurbishment project on LU !

This seems to be the equivalent of the SWR Class 701 introduction.

 

[Nym]

CLIP in one form or another has been going on for around 12 years now though…

 

[xtmw]

There's one unit running around with LED lighting (or at least I think so) fitted around 2009 as apart of a trial.

 

[thomalex]

It blows my mind we're waiting till December for just for the second train.

Given the stated 10 week refurbishment time I had presumed we'd be getting 2 trains in and out roughly every 2.5 months, not 1 in 8 months!

 

[Nym]

There's one unit running around with LED lighting (or at least I think so) fitted around 2009 as apart of a trial.

Yeah the LED lighting on 1992TS for CLIP is very different.

 

[xtmw]

Bit late but I've been told there's been a minor software update to the DVA system on the refurb unit. The 'mind the gap' and the destination announcement has been modified along with various other announcements

 

[Via Bank]

Hopefully they can do something about the screens being entirely blank for most of the time between stations(!) No reason not to flip between the train destination and next station to give additional reassurance to people that they’re on the right train.

 

[xtmw]

I tend to agree with this. Maybe could do something like 'The next station is Bank. This is a Central Line train to Hainault via Woodford.' like on the S Stock between stations.

 

[notverydeep]

It blows my mind we're waiting till December for just for the second train.

Given the stated 10 week refurbishment time I had presumed we'd be getting 2 trains in and out roughly every 2.5 months, not 1 in 8 months!

Prior to the pandemic, it was intended to merge the CLIP modifications with the next regular Programmed Lift (overhaul in National Rail speak). These are compulsory maintenance exams and are analogous to a car's MOT - without them, the train must be stopped. They have a set interval which cannot be exceeded (or at least has a limited allowable tolerance). The pandemic delays to CLIP meant that this would become necessary before the CLIP programme was ready and so the two projects had to be separated and the logistics and process design had to be rearranged, further delaying things. in 2024 and into 2025, the CLIP teams will mostly be delivering this now separate Programmed Lift, only returning to the CLIP modifications once this is largely completed, hence the much remaining works on the next few trains being pushed out.

 

[Nym]

Erm. Nope.

CLIP was delivered by COP which is part of capital programmes.
HOPL was delivered by COO the operations side.
Very few staff shared between these on the engineering side, other than those part of “TfL Engineering”.

CLIP was late long before COVID.

And yes we did try and get HOPL (Heavy Overhaul Programme Lift) renamed to Central Line Overhaul Programme.

To go with Bakerloo Line Improvement Programme.

 

[notverydeep]

Erm. Nope.

CLIP was delivered by COP which is part of capital programmes.
HOPL was delivered by COO the operations side.
Very few staff shared between these on the engineering side, other than those part of “TfL Engineering”.

CLIP was late long before COVID.

And yes we did try and get HOPL (Heavy Overhaul Programme Lift) renamed to Central Line Overhaul Programme.

To go with Bakerloo Line Improvement Programme.

The 'programme lift' for 2024 and 2025 refers to the intermediate (not sure of the exact term) overhaul that was to have been integrated with and delivered by the CLIP project. This is the next overhaul after HOPL (which had been finished before COVID and as you say was not delivered by the CLIP project). It was the pandemic delay to CLIP which meant that this specific programme lift had to be separated from the modification works, rather than the pre-pandemic delay...

I wasn't really intending to detail the exact internal boundaries between the different departments or projects and their staff - most of which have changed (or at least changed names) since the previous HOPL programme - though CLIP is still CLIP.