83TS

[astock5000]

In 'London Underground Rolling Stock' it says that the batch 2 units, one batch 1 unit, and 16 trailers from batch 1 units were kept, because at the time they were thinking of using them on the Piccadilly. The trailers were scrapped in 2000, when LU decided not to use 83TS on the Picc, but why would they have needed them anyway? 83TS cars are about the the same length as 73TS cars. The Picc doesn't have long enough platforms for 7-car 83TS, so what were they going to be used for?

[metman]

That's a good question. The only reason I can think of is the use of the trailers as UNDM. If extensive work was to be carried out in forming double doors on these cars I guess the creation of UNDM out of trailers, using DM equipment was possible?

[astock5000]

But what would have been the point? It would have cost a lot more than using DMs.

[Deleted]

Feb 20, 2009 23:15:42 GMT astock5000 said:

In 'London Underground Rolling Stock' it says that the batch 2 units, one batch 1 unit, and 16 trailers from batch 1 units were kept, because at the time they were thinking of using them on the Piccadilly. The trailers were scrapped in 2000, when LU decided not to use 83TS on the Picc, but why would they have needed them anyway? 83TS cars are about the the same length as 73TS cars. The Picc doesn't have long enough platforms for 7-car 83TS, so what were they going to be used for?

The 83ts was formed of 6 cars, not 7, so would have been able to run on the Piccadilly without too much difficulty.

Personally, I think the fact that these relatively new trains were simply scrapped was a terrible waste.

[maxtube]

Feb 21, 2009 10:52:39 GMT @tubeflight said:

Personally, I think the fact that these relatively new trains were simply scrapped was a terrible waste.

Correct.

[astock5000]

Feb 21, 2009 10:52:39 GMT @tubeflight said:

The 83ts was formed of 6 cars, not 7, so would have been able to run on the Piccadilly without too much difficulty.

Yes, they were 6-car on the Jubilee. My point was that as a 7-car wouldn't fit on the Picc, why did they keep some extra trailers?

I think that 83TS should have been used on the Picc between Acton Town and Uxbridge, as they wouldn't have needed to rebuild them with double doors if they didn't run in central London, and all 73TS could then have run services to Heathrow.

[towerman]

As with all things on LUL seemed like a good idea until they went into the cost.

[superteacher]

83 stock were doomed mainly because of the single leaf doors. They may have found use elsewhere had it not been for that.

[Tomcakes]

Wasn't this partially because at the time of design, there were lower levels of patronage and so TPTB decided to build trains 'on the cheap' as it were. I seem to remember that the number of compressors was lower than normal - such that a 3 car unit couldn't run alone (unless an extra compressor were fitted especially).

[Deleted]

well since the age of the a stock and if the met needed any spare they could have gone to the ell, I mean if 38 stock served it maybe they could to

[metman]

The problem was there were so many spare trains on the Met, the ELL was an easy choice for the A stock. The 83s could have gone to the ELL, think they would have been ok. I would have loved to see the 83 stock refurbed, the mock up looked good!

[Ben]

Mock up?

[metman]

Before the 96ts was considered, the plan was to take each 3 car 1983 stock train and add 3-4 brand new cars of a similar design to the 1983 trains, and refurbishing them in the process. The new cars were either to have single doors or, the whole train would receive double doors. The cost of the new cars and conversion of the old were excessive, so the 1996 ts was born.

The 83 reburb was used on the 1973 stock in the end.

[astock5000]

Feb 22, 2009 17:35:38 GMT metman said:

Before the 96ts was considered, the plan was to take each 3 car 1983 stock train and add 3-4 brand new cars of a similar design to the 1983 trains, and refurbishing them in the process. The new cars were either to have single doors or, the whole train would receive double doors. The cost of the new cars and conversion of the old were excessive, so the 1996 ts was born.

'London Underground Rolling Stock' says that is the reason why the windows on 95/96TS don't go up into the roof, like on 92TS.

[Ben]

Apologies, I thought you ment refurb in their own right, not as part of the 83-96 combo.

Indeed, wrt the windows. Try and make the cars look at least similar. Except the 96 has external doors...

I never fully understood how a combo of 96-83 would work in practice because it would lead to asymetrical units if 3 cars per train were converted and marshalled at ends.

[astock5000]

Feb 22, 2009 20:22:23 GMT Ben said:

Try and make the cars look at least similar. Except the 96 has external doors...

Maybe the 96TS would have looked a lot more like 83TS if that had have happened. The 83TS wasn't that old, so they could have built a third batch of 83TS.

[mrfs42]

Feb 22, 2009 20:22:23 GMT Ben said:

asymetrical units

Er....? Like 7-car 38TS becoming 4 car and 3 car (with CT).?

Where's your axis of symmetry? Number of axles, number of trailers? How many DMs per mixed set? How many 'east end' units?

*Interested*.

[astock5000]

I think he meant what cars would have been 83TS and what ones would have been new cars.

[Ben]

Precisely. If only 3 cars per 6 or 7 car train were of 83 ts, and were at the ends, it would be

83-96-96+96-83-83 or something of the sort. Unless you used 4 cars of 83 stock per train, but then the introduction of the 7th car would have resulted in 83-83-96-96+96-83-83 which, whilst symetrical, would have resulted in 4 different types of car, with each pair significantly different to the other. Hold on, doesnt the 96 fleet have four types of car anyway?....

[astock5000]

And there were twice as many 83TS DMs than trailers, so that wouldn't work. Anyway, I think the 96TS would have looked more like 83TS if this had happened (and that would mean the 95TS would either have looked more like 83TS as well, or would be completely different to the 96TS, and maybe would have looked like a longer 92TS).

[metman]

I don't think the 7 car plan had been conceived at that stage, so I guess the trains may have been formed: M83-T83-UNDM96+UNDM96-T96-M38, the other option was to keep the existing trains and add a batch 3 to the fleet. The 83ts was to be refurbed to the same design as the new third batch, with Warwick design leading the pack. It would seem to make better sense to have gone with this solution as the problems with adding to the existing trains are apparent. There are some interesting designs in Paul Moss's book 'Underground Movement' p208-213.

[Colin]

Well I've never understood why the 83ts never made it to the Isle of Wight......

[abe]

I'd heard that the plan for using the 1983 TS on the Piccadilly wasn't to lengthen the 1973 TS, but to provide extra trains - perhaps with the 1983 TS forming an Acton Town - Rayners Lane / Uxbridge dedicated service.

[Deleted]

The doors on the 83TS were simply too small. This meant that the only suitable place for the 83TS is train heaven (or maybe hell?).

[metman]

The plan with the 83ts on the Picc was indeed to provide extra trains for mainline service. The single doors as dicussed were the sticking point!

[maxtube]

Maybe they could have got cutting torches, cut the doors in half, add an extra motor to each one, and voila! ;D

[astock5000]

Feb 23, 2009 8:35:57 GMT metman said:

The plan with the 83ts on the Picc was indeed to provide extra trains for mainline service. The single doors as dicussed were the sticking point!

So why couldn't they be used on an Uxbridge/Rayners Lane - Acton Town service, with 73TS running on the rest of the Picc? The Uxbridge branch isn't that busy.

[Deleted]

Feb 23, 2009 11:23:51 GMT @maxtube said:

Maybe they could have got cutting torches, cut the doors in half, add an extra motor to each one, and voila! ;D

I think If these trains were available 5 or so years earlier they might have been bought by BR as replacement to the already very old 38 stock. The time these were scrapped from LU was just after BR privatizeation where the comapnies which bought into BR didn't want to spend money on short term contracts.

[astock5000]

But that would have been only a few years after the 38TS replaced the Standard stock on the IOW. Would BR have replaced them that quickly, as it would have been a waste of money converting the 38TS?

[Ben]

Rumour has it that Eastleigh underestimated the cost of a conversion of a 38ts set. Apparently this led to massive cost cutting. I heard this from a source a few years back on the IOW, but cannot confirm it.