is it me or have LU got their priorities completely wrong?

[A60stock]

Having read a number of other threads, its seems to me that the 1996 and 1995 stocks are being treated to a far better extent than the 1992

the reason i ask if because recently, the jubilee line has had new LED indicators installed and now tfl seem to be doing the same for the 1995 stock on the northern, which on top of this have had a refurbishment despite their newer age over the 1992 stock. Whats more i am also hearing that the 1996 stock will recieve a similar refurb?

Now dont get me wrong, this is great for the 1995/1996 stock, but the 1992 stock looks in awful state now, if anything, they are the trains MOST in need of a LED indicator change and most of all a PROPER refurbishment, (yes i know they got a refresh, but that has hardly changed anything when you compare it to the work on the 1995 stock)

I do not understand why tfl have instead decided to concentrate on refurbishing the 1995 and i certainly hope that the 1996 stock does not get one before the 1992 stock.

Anyone able to shed any light here as to why this is happening in such an odd order? Am i unaware of any future plans tfl have for all 3 stocks? Even the waterloo and city line 1992 stock got refurbished to a better extent! whats going on?!

[superteacher]

Perhaps they feel the 95 / 96 stock will last another 20 years! The 92 stock certainly won't!

[crusty54]

The Central Line will get new trains after the Piccadiily Line.

[snoggle]

You need to consider the 95 stock is provided by Alstom under a train service supply contract. I believe the contract with Alstom provides for a mid life refurb which will explain why there is an apparent concentration on the Northern Line stock now. While the Jubilee Line stock is not supplied under a PFI deal it's only a little older than the 95 stock but is being worked hard because the fleet size is borderline too small for the service operated. Making sure the stock is reliable and refurbed makes sense. As others have said there is probably more of a prospect of this stock lasting a full life time while that may not be the case for the Central Line where LU have clear aspirations to get rid of the 92s and put in the next generation of tube stock on the line.

I know the 92s are not in the best of states but the fundamental issues have been addressed in recent years - bodywork and the bogies IIRC. The interior refresh was more to do with smartening the fleet for the Olympics given the heavy reliance on the Central Line to get people to Stratford. There is little point spending a lot more money if the intent is that the fleet will be gone with 10-14 years (I'm guessing as to the time span as I've lost track as to what upgrade is scheduled for when).

[Alight]

Dec 27, 2014 19:01:18 GMT A60stock said:

...and most of all a PROPER refurbishment, (yes i know they got a refresh, but that has hardly changed anything when you compare it to the work on the 1995 stock)

I feel your frustration but on balance the '92 stock refresh (2011-2014) was slightly more extensive than that of the '95 stock, namely: new moquette, saloon window replacement, exterior filming with 'anti-graffiti' vinyl and cab-end/body-end panel replacement (nearly 60% of cars). However, this admittedly didn't go far enough and there were talks last year that, subject to approval, work would commence to fit new floor coverings and re-coat the grab rails - I'm not sure whether or not this received the thumbs up in the end.

Am I unaware of any future plans tfl have for all 3 stocks? Even the waterloo and city line 1992 stock got refurbished to a better extent! whats going on?!

Well, as others have pointed out, the '92 stock is scheduled to be replaced during the '20s. However, TfL will still need to make sure that the Rail Vehicle Accessibility Regulations are met in time for 01 January 2020 and as such there are plans to enhance the on-board CIS and make space for dedicated wheelchair bays... work would commence from 2017.

[North End]

Dec 27, 2014 19:01:18 GMT A60stock said:

Having read a number of other threads, its seems to me that the 1996 and 1995 stocks are being treated to a far better extent than the 1992

the reason i ask if because recently, the jubilee line has had new LED indicators installed and now tfl seem to be doing the same for the 1995 stock on the northern, which on top of this have had a refurbishment despite their newer age over the 1992 stock. Whats more i am also hearing that the 1996 stock will recieve a similar refurb?

Now dont get me wrong, this is great for the 1995/1996 stock, but the 1992 stock looks in awful state now, if anything, they are the trains MOST in need of a LED indicator change and most of all a PROPER refurbishment, (yes i know they got a refresh, but that has hardly changed anything when you compare it to the work on the 1995 stock)

I do not understand why tfl have instead decided to concentrate on refurbishing the 1995 and i certainly hope that the 1996 stock does not get one before the 1992 stock.

Anyone able to shed any light here as to why this is happening in such an odd order? Am i unaware of any future plans tfl have for all 3 stocks? Even the waterloo and city line 1992 stock got refurbished to a better extent! whats going on?!

I'm not sure the lifespan of the 92 stock is relevant to them being refurbished, although it may have a bearing on how much money can be justified on less essential works. There are three main issues with the 92 stock - obsolete electrical components from the 1990s, condition of the bodyshells, and disability compliance. The fleet replacement plans are in no way finalised yet, but whatever happens it's unlikely the 92 stock will be replaced until the late 2020s at the earliest, which will give them a roughly 35-year lifespan. All of the three issues will need to be addressed well before that. The main priority, given a need to justify expenditure, is replacing the 73 stock, as part of an upgrade to increase the capacity on that line. At present the Central Line achieves 34 tph in the peaks (albeit only just), which is way above what the Picc currently achieves, this alone makes the Picc upgrade a greater priority.

Remember the D stock was subject to a quite extensive, albeit less extensive than originally planned, refurbishment with roughly 10 years service life left. Whatever happens, the 92 stock has at least 10 years life left, probably quite a bit more. I think the issue is more that the 92 stock requires more extensive work to achieve disability compliance compared to the 95 & 96 stocks, which in their as-built form were already pretty compliant, and the level of work required to bring the trains up to standard was fairly minimal. In business speak, this is referred to as a "quick win". By contrast, the 92 stock will require some more substantial internal alterations.

With the 95 stock being very much a 'modular' train, where components are quite literally changed out in a short space of time, something like replacing the desination indicator is a relatively quick and cheap job, as evidenced by the speed the new indicators have been rolled out. I wouldn't mind betting that the 92 stock destination indicator isn't fully compliant with current standards, and unlike the 95 & 96 stocks I would suggest it's probably not possible to fit a compliant indicator in the space available, making it a more substantial and costly piece of work on those trains.

[A60stock]

thanks you all for the replies, just a few following on from them:

@north End

If the 92 stock electrical components are obsolete, surely the 95 and 96 stocks components are also obsolete?

Surely the inidcators on the 92 stock are also larger than the 95/96?

@alight

What do you mean by upgrade to the CIS? I assume you mean adding dmis iniside the carriages which in any case, where would you place them?

crusty54

your reply implies that the 92 stock will be replaced before the 72 stock on the bakerloo? Surely this is a very odd move by tfl?

Correct me if im wrong!

[crusty54]

The 92 stock has been a disaster from the start.

They thankfully will go before the 72 stock.

[North End]

Dec 29, 2014 13:46:27 GMT A60stock said:

thanks you all for the replies, just a few following on from them:

@north End

If the 92 stock electrical components are obsolete, surely the 95 and 96 stocks components are also obsolete?

Surely the inidcators on the 92 stock are also larger than the 95/96?

@alight

What do you mean by upgrade to the CIS? I assume you mean adding dmis iniside the carriages which in any case, where would you place them?

crusty54

your reply implies that the 92 stock will be replaced before the 72 stock on the bakerloo? Surely this is a very odd move by tfl?

Correct me if im wrong!

I don't believe the 95 & 96 stocks are affected in quite the same way. Remember much of the 92 stock design dates from the 1980s. This was in an age when technology was developing fast. I know the 96 stock traction package is considered obsolete now, however the 95 stock setup is broadly the same as trains built today. Also, items like the ATO/ATP equipment date from the 1990s, whereas on the 95 & 96 stocks these systems have only just been installed.

Regarding the destination displays, the 95 stock displays are deeper in size, which I would imagine better lends them to being made compliant.

[Alight]

Dec 29, 2014 13:46:27 GMT A60stock said:

What do you mean by upgrade to the CIS? I assume you mean adding dmis iniside the carriages which in any case, where would you place them?

CIS = Customer Information System

So yes, DMIs would need to be added in order to fully comply. Perhaps they could place one above each interconnecting door á la the '86 stock, although this could be quite taxing on the customers sitting in the middle part of the car.

[plasmid]

The mechanical doors are in need of some TLC. Unbelievably slow at closing on a cold morning and worse than previous years.