Opinions in transferring old Glasgow Metro trains to the Island Line

[waterboo]

With the Glasgow Metro going fully automated by 2020, with a new set of rolling stock being constructed, could the old stock see a future working on the metals on the Island Line.

The advantages I could see is that the Glasgow stock would be released a lot more quickly than the London Underground stock.. something which is important because the poor 1938's are trundling along the tracks on mobility frames now..

It is also built for third rail.. meaning unlike the London Underground stock, the traction supply would not need to be modified.

Furthurmore, it's been recently refurbished, so would be entering the island line in relatively good condition.

What are your opinions?

 

[Redonian]

Well, it would need regauging for a start.

 

[TC60054]

Doesn't the Glasgow Subway run to a different gauge than the Island line, so wouldn't be possible to do?

 

[DarloRich]

they are tiny and a different gauge - surely a tram system would be better for the island line

 

[craigy68]

Is the Island Line heavily subsidised ?

 

[MrB]

This article (http://www.islandecho.co.uk/news/is-the-future-trams-and-steam-trains-into-ryde) suggests that the London Underground stock wouldn't be released until the late 2020s and that trams could be bought second hand from Midland Metro. The proposal is for the line to be singled with passing places and a service with 15-minute frequency.

London Underground trains would not be available until 2027; the replacement stock would be over 40 years old and would be expensive to convert.

The suggestion made is to run a single-line tram operation with passing points to allow for reduced running costs and a 15-minute frequency. Although there would still need to be investment in the line, the operating costs are said to be much cheaper and second-hand trams are now becoming available. A tram system would also offer the potential for expansion including ‘street running’, if desired.

 

[swt_passenger]

This article (http://www.islandecho.co.uk/news/is-the-future-trams-and-steam-trains-into-ryde) suggests that the London Underground stock wouldn't be released until the late 2020s and that trams could be bought second hand from Midland Metro. The proposal is for the line to be singled with passing places and a service with 15-minute frequency.

Written by vested interests. SWT have always said they would convert LU 73 stock from the Piccadilly line, the current issue is that LU are well behind schedule on their new tube for London programme.

That in itself would not make the stock any more difficult to convert, it would certainly make it older on introduction.

 

[Domh245]

Written by vested interests. SWT have always said they would convert LU 73 stock from the Piccadilly line, the current issue is that LU are well behind schedule on their new tube for London programme.

That in itself would not make the stock any more difficult to convert, it would certainly make it older on introduction.

I'm trying to think what would need to be converted. The only thing that immediately comes to mind is the pickup shoes to convert it from 4th rail to 3rd rail (which isn't *too* hard to do), what else would there be?

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm trying to think what would need to be converted. The only thing that immediately comes to mind is the pickup shoes to convert it from 4th rail to 3rd rail (which isn't *too* hard to do), what else would there be?

Can't think of anything significant. I guess as SWT have been mentioning '73 stock for so long now that they at least have a bit of an idea what to do, I don't suppose they'll wait until they start appearing on the ferry...

 

[D6975]

The proposal is for the line to be singled with passing places and a service with 15-minute frequency.

It's already single.
A 15 min frequency would mean installing extra passing loops, not any kind of reduction.

 

[birchesgreen]

I realise this would cost money and thus would never happen but it would be nice to tag onto a new tube stock order, they only need about 10 cars to run the Island Line service. How much would 10 cars of 1996TS cost?

 

[najaB]

I realise this would cost money and thus would never happen but it would be nice to tag onto a new tube stock order, they only need about 10 cars to run the Island Line service. How much would 10 cars of 1996TS cost?

I agree it would be nice, but I can't see it happening - ordering brand new stock for the Island line while perfectly good second-hand stock is scrapped.

 

[HLE]

What about D trains!!!!

 

[birchesgreen]

What stock T69s? They seem a bit clapped out to me, plus you would have all the costs of conversion of the line.

I read somewhere the W&C 1992TS stock would be replaced by NTfL first in the early 2020s so that might be an option if they can keep the 483s going. Might be enough 1973TS by then anyway if the Island Line want to stay analogue as they have said before.

 

[Agent_c]

I'm suprised anyone wants those little orange rattlers.... well overdue for the scrappy IMO...

 

[me123]

And they will go to the scrappy! As has been pointed out, it's a unique little system, so there's nowhere for the trains to go once they are finally retired.

 

[Shimbleshanks]

And they will go to the scrappy! As has been pointed out, it's a unique little system, so there's nowhere for the trains to go once they are finally retired.

Unless there's a scheme to reopen the Padarn Railway in North Wales and electrify it...

I wonder what possessed them to build the Glasgow Subway to 4ft gauge? It's not significantly narrower than standard gauge, so no great saving in construction costs, but the gauge difference both precludes use of off-the shelf-trains (or at any rate bogies) and also ensures that it is doomed never to be connected up to any other railways.

 

[Clansman]

Could always see them go to the Transport Museum to be along side the old trams. Although I agree, they've nowhere to go and as another user said they're just Orange Rattlers with a pointlessly small track gauge. A tram link or holding out for London Underground stock is the only options for the Island Line.

 

[snowball]

Is there a reason, other than timing of availability, why the Island Line uses ex-LU-tube stock rather than ex-LU-sub-surface stock?

 

[swt_passenger]

Is there a reason, other than timing of availability, why the Island Line uses ex-LU-tube stock rather than ex-LU-sub-surface stock?

Ryde tunnel? I think one of the previous Island Line threads eventually found a link to a drawing of the problem, but basically they raised the track bed as part of drainage changes, and took about a foot out of the available height, and that rules out standard gauge stock. 'Tube gauge' is much smaller than the tunnel could cope with, but obviously there is nothing else on the market available for use without building something special.

Hence the suggestions of tailor made trams etc, but this was discussed only a few months ago in a dedicated Island Line thread...

 

[Mordac]

I'm suprised anyone wants those little orange rattlers.... well overdue for the scrappy IMO...

I think this forum has shown time and again it can always think of uses for even the most clapped out rolling stock... and yes, even I'm guilty of that on occasion, though I find these are a bridge too far

 

[matchmaker]

I'm suprised anyone wants those little orange rattlers.... well overdue for the scrappy IMO...

Rattlers? Not to one who well remembers the original stock! Some of it over 80 years old when withdrawn. They REALLY rattled (or shoogled)!

 

[gsnedders]

I wonder what possessed them to build the Glasgow Subway to 4ft gauge? It's not significantly narrower than standard gauge, so no great saving in construction costs, but the gauge difference both precludes use of off-the shelf-trains (or at any rate bogies) and also ensures that it is doomed never to be connected up to any other railways.

It was a deliberate move to avoid it being connected up to the any other railway and being subsumed by a larger company's network.

 

[Shimbleshanks]

It was a deliberate move to avoid it being connected up to the any other railway and being subsumed by a larger company's network.

It certainly worked in that case...

 

[Wolfie]

This article (http://www.islandecho.co.uk/news/is-the-future-trams-and-steam-trains-into-ryde) suggests that the London Underground stock wouldn't be released until the late 2020s and that trams could be bought second hand from Midland Metro. The proposal is for the line to be singled with passing places and a service with 15-minute frequency.

Is that the unreliable clapped out (else why would relatively new stock be being replaced so early, look at tram life in Europe) Ansaldo Breda trams which Midland Metro wants rid of (and indeed Manchester similarly is getting rid of it's related stock)? If so methinks that the plan is duff to put it politely.....

 

[Mikey C]

I agree it would be nice, but I can't see it happening - ordering brand new stock for the Island line while perfectly good second-hand stock is scrapped.

The 73 stock will be 50 years old by the time it's available, so not exactly in the flush of youth!

 

[Wolfie]

The 73 stock will be 50 years old by the time it's available, so not exactly in the flush of youth!

True... but LOTS of spares available given the size of the 73 stock fleet and the likely Island line requirement...

 

[Michael.Y]

What about D trains!!!!

They're subsurface, not tube stock. i.e. too tall.

 

[najaB]

The 73 stock will be 50 years old by the time it's available, so not exactly in the flush of youth!

Only 50 years young? They're well built and as Wolfie points out there are a lot more of them than are needed so there are lots of components available.

 

[birchesgreen]

Let me be clear when i mentioned buying new stock i meant instead of the T69s not the 73ts which i agree should be able to serve well for a long time following a full rebuild. The issue will be can the 483s last another 8-10 years?