metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 12, 2009 20:52:58 GMT
Having been on the Bakerloo a couple of times this year I can certainly notice some changes. The doors are smoother (they were rehung and refurbed I think), the seal round them is nice and new, the interiors look (a little) cleaner and the motors sound less tired and crisper.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2009 22:15:26 GMT
Funny you should say that, I was on the Bakerloo today and I thought it was a bit faster and just generally a better journey, thought I was imagining things  |
|
mrfs42
71E25683904T 172E6538094T
Big Hair Day
Posts: 5,922
|
Post by mrfs42 on Jan 12, 2009 22:15:55 GMT
Yes - I noticed that a few of the DMs had spangly new seals in the window glass the other week. Unfortunately due to various non-related bits of faffing around London Below that day I only travelled in either leading or trailing DMs; have entire units been given a bit of a birthday, or is it just a select bunch of cars?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 12, 2009 23:05:39 GMT
The window thing seems hit and miss, but the LT 115 motors and door mechs do seem crisper on all cars. The motors sound like they're been refurbed. They still judder away (which is why I like them!) under the pcm control until they can get into full parallel, but the note of the motor is different.
|
|
|
|
Post by ruislip on Jan 13, 2009 3:01:54 GMT
I guess they still have the "no smoking" warnings in roundels.
|
|
|
|
Post by astock5000 on Jan 13, 2009 21:34:48 GMT
I guess they still have the "no smoking" warnings in roundels. They do, and I think it is unlikely they will ever get changed, as the C stock (and some A stock cars) still have them, and I don't think there is any point in replacing them anyway. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2009 8:40:40 GMT
For a few months now the service delivery team have been spending one day a week sorting out the minor issues that were ignored during the Metronet debacle. If I remember correctly they have been working on one train at a time but doing EVERYTHING. So some trains will look dreck but others will look all spangly new.
|
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Jan 14, 2009 8:59:00 GMT
I guess they still have the "no smoking" warnings in roundels. They do, and I think it is unlikely they will ever get changed, as the C stock (and some A stock cars) still have them, and I don't think there is any point in replacing them anyway. They should be *installing* them on 92/95/96/09TS! Plus suitable 'no alcohol' signs in cars (not that it will ever be enforced - see NYE 2008/9). |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 14, 2009 10:31:16 GMT
I'm surprised that it hasn't been necessary to festoon every entrance to every train with the "it is against the to smoke on this premises" signs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tubeboy on Jan 14, 2009 21:18:27 GMT
When were the 72s last refurbed, was it 1990-5?
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,421
|
Post by metman on Jan 15, 2009 0:02:33 GMT
1989-1992 maybe?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2009 0:08:28 GMT
The interiors received new moquette more recently though?
IIRC the 72 stock were still receiving heavy overhauls at Stonebridge Park - presumably this was only for equipment rather than the interiors.
|
|
towerman
My status is now now widower
Posts: 2,968
|
Post by towerman on Jan 15, 2009 18:55:09 GMT
IMO the depot HO's are nowhere near as good as the ones done at Acton,they used to come out like a new train,now they don't even clean the dirt off the shoebeams!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2009 4:10:51 GMT
They should be *installing* them on 92/95/96/09TS! Plus suitable 'no alcohol' signs in cars (not that it will ever be enforced - see NYE 2008/9). Interesting point, I wonder if the alcohol ban can be legally enforced anyway as there are no signto instruct passengers not to drink. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2009 5:12:18 GMT
Could it be in the conditions of carriage? And do you even need a reason to kick someone off the system? Doubt that the intentions of the alcohol ban were to stop people having a few beers on the tube on NYE, it's more a day-to-day thing for tramps and Friday/Saturday nights.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2009 10:05:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Jan 19, 2009 10:14:29 GMT
I'm surprised that it hasn't been necessary to festoon every entrance to every train with the "it is against the to smoke on this premises" signs. Yes, I wonder how 'enforcable' this is (although LU premises were covered by legislation before the latest ban) |
|
|
|
Post by thirstquensher on Feb 26, 2009 19:53:10 GMT
A rasta (white) tramp was guzzling away, crouched in a vestibule corner, on his can of Kronenburg completely unchallenged on the DLR the other evening. No-one seemed to care, let alone the PSA.
And I've lost count of the times I've been stuck in a carriage pressed against the wall by a group of early-20-something Polish guys and girls where the guys have all had their (obligatory, it seems) can of beer in hand - again - no PSA disapproval shown at all. I find any group of people who have this "look at us, we're just having fun" look about them tend to get left alone - as do the group of people who have this "but this is the only thing I can afford to drink" look about them. Funny how those with little to spend can afford cans of beer but not bottles of Evian or Fanta. Hmmm.
I don't actually mind someone drinking on a train unless it impacts on their behaviour or, as is more common, they stink of it and they're close to me. Or even worse, if they smell of 20 pints AND 20 cigarettes. Groo.
|
|
