Joined: Feb 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 427 Location: West London
Re: Trial-refurbishment question « Reply #15 on Oct 28, 2009, 11:19am »
The official line at the time was that 4 plus a spare (1938) were brought back for the Northern Line. In reality, all five ran with no distinction about a particular one being 'spare'. Whether all five actually ran at any one time, I don't know but there was nothing to stop it doing so.
The official line at the time was that 4 plus a spare (1938) were brought back for the Northern Line. In reality, all five ran with no distinction about a particular one being 'spare'. Whether all five actually ran at any one time, I don't know but there was nothing to stop it doing so.
When lines run a mixture of stock, do they each have their own diagrams or are they used completely interchangeably? At present only the Victoria line has a mixture, (and the 09 stock seems indeed to be limited to certain workings) but in the past I would expect that different services on the same line would have to be operated by specific train types because of the need for the right stock to end up at the right depot, the need to ensure a driver booked to take over a train was qualified to drive it.
In olden days, there were special factors such as the 9-coach project on the Northern Line and, on the District, the need for an R-stock train to turn up when it was time for attaching the extra 2 cars to a 6-coach train for the evening peak.
If separate scehduling was the practice on the Northern, and there were only four 1938-stock diagrams, the fifth unit could only have been pressed into service to cover a 1972 or 1959 diagram, which would have been very much a last resort.
Joined: Feb 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 427 Location: West London
Re: Trial-refurbishment question « Reply #17 on Oct 28, 2009, 8:51pm »
The Northern Line timetable at the time made no distinction as to what stock worked which service, which also applied to the 1972s as well. I daresay the depots had their own plan for stock allocation for maintenance reasons, as to which trains stabled early, all of which was subject to the state of the service.
The District did have nominated stock workings until 1971, but it wasn't unusual for something else to be substituted from time to time, with the depots telling the Traffic Controller the variations.
When the new trains were being introduced onto the Central c.1960, again there were nominated workings during the transition stage: '7' or '8' (Standard Stock), 'N8' (1959/62) and 'C8' (Cravens).
On the Piccadilly it was '7' (Standard Stock), 'U7' (1938 Stock with UNDMs) and 'N7' (1959 Stock).
The Bakerloo and Northern were '7' (1938 with a 3- and 4-car unit with a DM car at each end of each unit) and 'U7' (1938 which included the three-car with UNDM).
The Met, of course, showed SS6 (Steam Stock), PP3 (Push & Pull), P6 and P8 (P Stock), T6 and T8 (T Stock) and F8 (F Stock). The H&C in the 1950s was O6 and the Circle P5. The Met continued with A8 and A4 for many years.
Joined: Oct 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 2,595 Location: Northwood-on the Met main line
Re: Trial-refurbishment question « Reply #18 on Nov 6, 2009, 1:16am »
I guess made complicated by CO and CP in the late 50s early 60s! The Circle stock although consisting of both O and P stock was no doubt simply signed 'P' then?
I guess made complicated by CO and CP in the late 50s early 60s! The Circle stock although consisting of both O and P stock was no doubt simply signed 'P' then?
![[Home]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif)
![[Help]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif)
![[Search]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif)
![[Login]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif)
![[Register]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif)
![[Search This Thread]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/search2.gif)
![[Send Topic To Friend]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/sendtopic.gif)
![[Print]](http://s4.images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif)
Author
Logged![[avatar]](http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m6/Adthelad/DSCN0633.jpg)
