The last day of the 1959 stock

[mowat]

It's six years to the day today since the last train of 1959 stock ran in service. See the link below for a account of the last run. Let's hope that unit 1304 is reformed then we may see 1959 stock running once more. www.squarewheels.org.uk/rly/1959final/

[Deleted]

mowat said:

Let's hope that unit 1304 is reformed then we may see 1959 stock running once more.

Let's hope so. I would be so pleased to see/go on one again

[Deleted]

I wonder how many people here traveled on that specially arranged train. I knew about it but just couldn't make it on the day. My last 59 was the heritage train a few days before Xmas 1999.

[bwhughes]

Was the surviving unit to be 'spruced up' to make it a little less grimy than what it was in the latter years of operation?

I have travelled on three or four of the 1959 stock trains back in something like 1994/5 at the age of 5, and they were all quite filthy. Or they definately wern't very attractive to the eye.

The unpainted aluminium body certainly never took my fancy! I believe it was a grave cosmetic mistake to use this approach; the London Underground lines are too dirty for the aluminium to stay clean for long!

It makes the unrefurbished D-Stock look old-fashioned and decrepid compared to the trains on most other metro systems on the Continent.

The problem with this approach was that constant running in tunnels leads to accumulation of dust and dirt built up from years of operation; this quickly shows on an unpainted aluminium exterior.

If the reinstated unit is to be regarded with more respect and nostalgia I would have thought that repainting it in London Transport red with new 1950s-style seats (as has been done to a preserved car used by London Underground as some form of workroom) would be a good idea.

[Deleted]

but the point of keeping a preserved stock, is to preserve it as it was, not modify it to how it should be.

If the D stock was withdrawn pre-refurb, and we saved one for preservation, we wouldn't refurbish one 'because it would be better that way'

we already have a nostalgia train, what we want is how the train actually was!

[Phil]

bwhughes said:

I believe it was a grave cosmetic mistake to use this approach; the London Underground lines are too dirty for the aluminium to stay clean for long!

Ah, but unpainted never WAS a cosmetic decision: it was financial. Not only the cost of the paint, but the saving of a huge amount of weight too meant less electricity was used.

And anyway, when they were new (for a few years, not weeks!) they looked brilliant. And since the lowlife hadn't worked out how to get to the trains to graffiti them, they stayed looking nice.

[prjb]

The aluminium 72MkI in the LT Musuem has been buffed back to as new a condition as possible, and I think it looks great.

Phil is right, but not only was the decision 'not to paint' not a cosmetic consideration, the decision 'to paint' wasn't either. The reason why LU first began to apply a corporate image to their stock was in order to give a 'management is in charge' impression to the customers.

[prjb]

BTW, the LT Museum have a policy of maintaining their stock in the style they finally left service in.

[Deleted]

prjb said:

Phil is right, but not only was the decision 'not to paint' not a cosmetic consideration, the decision 'to paint' wasn't either. The reason why LU first began to apply a corporate image to their stock was in order to give a 'management is in charge' impression to the customers.

TBH, I think it was a good decision, by the 1980s , even before the graffiti craze the 59/62s were looking weathered and grimy. Unpainted trains look nice at first but don't age well.

[Deleted]

prjb said:

BTW, the LT Museum have a policy of maintaining their stock in the style they finally left service in.

Presumably that is for cost reasons? It's always going to be cheaper to keep a train in the condition you received it rather then try to reinstate original features.

Not that this is necessarily a bad thing - we have to be realistic about the funds available and use them to preserve as many different stocks as possible.

[mandgc]

Condition of Museum Stock.

I think I read that York's rule is to maintain exhibits in their 'Withdrawn' condition.

Of course 'restoring' an exhibit to an earlier condition could be rather costly (ie. De-streamlined to streamlined, Double to single chimney and so on.

[prjb]

adw said:

prjb said:

BTW, the LT Museum have a policy of maintaining their stock in the style they finally left service in.

Presumably that is for cost reasons? It's always going to be cheaper to keep a train in the condition you received it rather then try to reinstate original features.

Not that this is necessarily a bad thing - we have to be realistic about the funds available and use them to preserve as many different stocks as possible.

mandgc said:

Condition of Museum Stock.

I think I read that York's rule is to maintain exhibits in their 'Withdrawn' condition.

Of course 'restoring' an exhibit to an earlier condition could be rather costly (ie. De-streamlined to streamlined, Double to single chimney and so on.

That is exactly why the LTM do this. They had to make a decision on what to do and it seems logical to keep them in their withdrawn state.

[Deleted]

but surely they would try and match all the seating moquettes up, so that there would be the proper 1959 stock seats not the orange northern line covers.

[mowat]

bwhughes said:

Was the surviving unit to be 'spruced up' to make it a little less grimy than what it was in the latter years of operation?

I have travelled on three or four of the 1959 stock trains back in something like 1994/5 at the age of 5, and they were all quite filthy. Or they definately wern't very attractive to the eye.

The unpainted aluminium body certainly never took my fancy! I believe it was a grave cosmetic mistake to use this approach; the London Underground lines are too dirty for the aluminium to stay clean for long!

It makes the unrefurbished D-Stock look old-fashioned and decrepid compared to the trains on most other metro systems on the Continent.

The problem with this approach was that constant running in tunnels leads to accumulation of dust and dirt built up from years of operation; this quickly shows on an unpainted aluminium exterior.

If the reinstated unit is to be regarded with more respect and nostalgia I would have thought that repainting it in London Transport red with new 1950s-style seats (as has been done to a preserved car used by London Underground as some form of workroom) would be a good idea.

The car preserved by Alstom (DM 1031) was part of the Northern Line Heritage train hence the 1920's red livery. This train (units 1044/1031) was painted red in 1990 for the centenary of the Northern Line. The surviving compleat unit 1304, has not (as far as I know) yet been reformed, three cars DM 1304, T 2304 & NDM 9305 from this unit, plus DM 1018 & T 2018, are owned by Rodger Brown, cars 1304-2018-1018 are in his garden, cars 2304/9305 are in storage. DM 1305 is owned by the Sutton Hall Railway. I have not heard from Rodger Brown for around a year, (the last I heard he was thinking about buying 1305) but I will get in contact with him and find out the latest.
P.S. from what I understand Rodger is going to restore his cars to 1970/80's condition.

[Ben]

This is entirely my opinion, and off topic too, so please forgive me! I always thought there were three important phases in a stocks life that a preserved unit could aim to recreate, those being the origional condition, the final condition, and the new standard currently in commercial use.

Whilst the 59 stock did look nice in herritage livery, preserving a uit of the stock in this would only serve as a curiosity; it not being representative of the majority of the stock either at the start of revenue earning life or at the end. Remember too that there was a unit semi refurbished in LUL corporate, and whilst there would be a sick pleasure to be gained from seeing this up and about (indeed perhaps the CO/CP stock or even the standard tube stock in red white and blue), it wouldnt nessessarily be appropriate. If there was only one car of 59 preserved it would have to be a plain aluminium one. Buffed up they look beautifull even today, so just imagine how much of a stir they must have caused when first new.
Back on thread I think the LT museum have made a very good decision to do that. They would have encounterd a lot more hassel. Would we prefer 2 cars preserved in withdrawn (yet neat) condition, or one car in origional condition?

[Deleted]

www.suttonhallrailway.com/GALLERY.html

See here for DM 1305 pics

[mowat]

From the horse's mouth.

Hi Tim,

Thanks for your email.

Not much happening on the 59 stock front I'm afraid, mainly due to lack of time. 1304, 1018 an 2018 remain in my back garden. 1304 has had an external clean up this Summer, but not the other two. Cars 2304 and 9305 remain at Dinton. I haven't even had tme to go there to clean them since their arrival a year ago this week. 1305 is still at Sutton Hall Railway and they are happy to hang on to them for the time being.

My main concern is that Dinton were very keen to have the tube cars and indeed any rolling stock, a year ago. (A 4TC set came down from West Ruislip at the time my two cars went there). But since then they have taken on a huge contract to store containers for Southampton Docks. Obviously more profitable than railway rolling stock, because they don't seem to want any more carriages. In fact they were trying to move the 4TC set out the last time I spoke to them, though they didn't mention the 2 tube cars!

So its status quo at the moment. I'm happy to pay the rent and let 2304 and 9305 remain at Dinton, I have a contract with them so hopefully they are secure for the time being. But I'm hoping that 1305 can remain at Sutton Hall until we (hopefully) find somewhere permanent for the four car unit. Any suggestions?

Roger.
____________________________________________________