LU Metropolitan A class. Any mainline reuse possible?

[biggus]

What conversion steps would be required before A class stock could run on third rail NR routes?

Aren't there any DC electrified branch lines that could make very good use of some extra 75 mph sets to run in the peaks?

The stock may be 50 years old, but there are plenty of much lighter duties than LU work on the national network. Perhaps the old stock could hold its own in such places. In 2011, how did A stock hold up against the competition on miles between failures?

 

[causton]

Rebuilding them again from the pile of scrap metal they are currently would be a good start!

 

[Simon11]

Rebuilding them again from the pile of scrap metal they are currently would be a good start!

It would be like a massive jigsaw with million of parts!

 

[causton]

It would be like a massive jigsaw with million of parts!

And at the end you'd wonder where the luggage racks had got to

 

[W-on-Sea]

Well, first, I think they were the widest trains anywhere in the UK, so you'd have had gauging issues to deal with...

And, then....well, let's just say their deteriorating performance had become increasingly evident for quite a few years. I'm fairly sure they were not getting close to 75mph lately! So much so that it could be as quick to get the Jubilee from Finchley Road to Wembley Park, despite the numerous additional stops.

They were grand old trains - but their retirement really has been well earned.

 

[transmanche]

They were also 2.9m wide (9cm wider than a Class 165) which could have caused a few clearance issues. In fact I'm sure I read somewhere that they were the widest carriages operating in GB.

 

[Class377/5]

They were also 2.9m wide (9cm wider than a Class 165) which could have caused a few clearance issues. In fact I'm sure I read somewhere that they were the widest carriages operating in GB.

They were the widest trains. A hangover from part of the Tube actually being two gauges when it opened in 1863.

 

[John55]

They were also 2.9m wide (9cm wider than a Class 165) which could have caused a few clearance issues. In fact I'm sure I read somewhere that they were the widest carriages operating in GB.

They were the widest trains. A hangover from part of the Tube actually being two gauges when it opened in 1863.

Most of the Met was never dual gauge.

Much more important is the fact that the coaches were/are only 16m long. A short coach can be wider than average and still operate within a relatively normal loading gauge.

There have been longer, wider coaches used in the UK but as with the A stock for use in limited parts of the network.

 

[HSTEd]

... Might I bring up the D-stock?

Would certainly solve the Lymington Shuttle unit being a Class 158 due to a shortage of electrics as I understand it some of the units are formed of 3-car sets with cabs at both ends or could be relatively easily remarshalled into such formations.

Then there is always that Harrogate proposal...

 

[williamn]

Has a set been preserved?

 

[Eagle]

Aren't there any DC electrified branch lines that could make very good use of some extra 75 mph sets to run in the peaks?

Top speed was 70, not 75, but they were artificially limited to 50 mph.

Top speed now is in the region of 0 mph, of course. :P

 

[Class377/5]

Most of the Met was never dual gauge.

Much more important is the fact that the coaches were/are only 16m long. A short coach can be wider than average and still operate within a relatively normal loading gauge.

There have been longer, wider coaches used in the UK but as with the A stock for use in limited parts of the network.

Er yes it was. The original line opened in 1863 (Paddington - Farringdon) as broad gauge as well as standard gauge. It was this wider route which allowed the A stock to be designed wider than anything else in the UK.

The reason for the dual gauge was to allow broad trains from the GW to run through.

Has a set been preserved?

yes, four car double end unit has been saved by the Transport Museum.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Most of the Met was never dual gauge.

Much more important is the fact that the coaches were/are only 16m long. A short coach can be wider than average and still operate within a relatively normal loading gauge.

That is not quite the case. There is a static loading gauge which sets an absolute maximum width, however short the vehicle. The BR system is at the point where that maximum width is possible for up to 20 metre long vehicles. After that, width must be reduced by an amount roughly proportional to length squared. Or clearances have to be improved. Which is one reason why the 26 metre IEP is such a dubious concept.

 

[NSEFAN]

I think realistically the only thing the 4 car preserved set can now do is operate on the Chesham branch, perhaps during the Rickmansworth festival when Sarah Siddons and the 1938 unit are in operation?

Apart from that, would the stock be too wide for lines outside the Metropolitan for enthusiast tours?

 

[jopsuk]

there's a single Driving car in the museum depot at Acton- delivered by road recently.

There's also the unit(s?) retained as a rail head treatment unit - actually five carriages long, with an additional trailer containing all the sandite kit in the middle

 

[Dstock7080]

Only one car (5034 ex-5008) has been kept by the LT Museum.
2 5-car Sandite trains are still available for use, unit 5112 is stored at Acton Works in case these are severely damaged somehow.

 

[RAGNARØKR]

Re-use the aluminium to make Pendolinos or IEP trains?

 

[Class377/5]

I think realistically the only thing the 4 car preserved set can now do is operate on the Chesham branch, perhaps during the Rickmansworth festival when Sarah Siddons and the 1938 unit are in operation?

Apart from that, would the stock be too wide for lines outside the Metropolitan for enthusiast tours?

Its cleared on the District via Aldgate as far as Whitechapel (for the old ELL connection).

 

[John55]

Er yes it was. The original line opened in 1863 (Paddington - Farringdon) as broad gauge as well as standard gauge. It was this wider route which allowed the A stock to be designed wider than anything else in the UK.

The reason for the dual gauge was to allow broad trains from the GW to run through.

The Metropolitan Railway was dual gauge south of Baker St but the much more extensive network north of Baker St was standard gauge only (hence "Most" in my post). In fact the MR only ever owned and operated standard gauge trains themselves.

The size of the MR loading gauge was determined by the network north of Baker St as well as the southern part.

That is not quite the case. There is a static loading gauge which sets an absolute maximum width, however short the vehicle. The BR system is at the point where that maximum width is possible for up to 20 metre long vehicles. After that, width must be reduced by an amount roughly proportional to length squared. Or clearances have to be improved. Which is one reason why the 26 metre IEP is such a dubious concept.

I wasn't talking about universal loading gauges as adopted by BR. The A stock was designed and built for the railway it ran on and was limited to use on that railway so it was possible to build it wider than normal after surveying the route and finding out what is possible. In this case shorter bodies can lead to wider bodies. I am sure the extra 6 inches of width was well worth the effort for a generation of travellers.

 

[D365]

If anything, I assume D Stock would be better, since it had been proposed for Harrogate. Don't suppose 25kV could be fitted though.

 

[biggus]

They were also 2.9m wide (9cm wider than a Class 165) which could have caused a few clearance issues. In fact I'm sure I read somewhere that they were the widest carriages operating in GB.

I seem to recall that the loading gauge on the Tunnel and HS1 are nice and wide. Perhaps the answer is to install third rail DC electrification between St Pancras and Paris to give the old sets something to do

Ok, if loading gauge is out for the national network then that is a definitive dealbreaker.

I am less persuaded by the assumption that their state of repair is unacceptable in terms of reliability, though I do not mean to question the experience of anyone involved in operating them who may have posted above. Has the Metropolitan line been plagued by train failures in recent years? My assumption is that the LU fitters deserve more credit than that.

It is conceivable that reliable stock would be scrapped if running costs (routine maintenance, electricity etc) were too high in view of technological advances and the high daily mileage and hard duty that LU stock has to perform. By contrast, for an EMU on a branch line running peak relief services, the fixed leasing costs would logically account for a much greater proportion of per mile costs relative to the variable operating costs.

So a vehicle that you can buy for scrap value at the expense of relatively high operating costs could be very attractive in this situation, provided it doesn't actually fail all the time.

FWIW, the set used on the fairwell tour was clocked at 74 MPH, according to the correspondent from RAIL, but they are usually limited to 50. I wouldn't be suprised if this was down to crashworthiness. (LU may have judged that a trainload of enthusiasts and rail journalists were up for the chance to die happy)

... Anyway, gauging problems seem to be the killer. Oh well

I presume the bodies of the new units are built to the non-standard loading gauge? Or do they just have protruding doorsteps to reach the platforms?

 

[jopsuk]

25kV would be very difficult to fit. The D-Stock will not find a new life elsewhere, it will be sent to the scrapyards like the A and C stock before it.

As for retaining a unit as an active "railtour" special, obviously even for existing stock such as the 1938 unit this will become increasingly tricky as the newer signalling systems get installed- but at least the 1938 unit (and the Standard Stock unit that's being slowly worked on) can physically fit everywhere. The C-Stock should be able to go anywhere on the sub surface lines- not sure about D, is it train length that stops it going to Edgeware Road or would the carriages foul structures? Regardless, they're restricted to the SSL, whereas only the W&C is truly out of bounds for the tube units.

 

[AlexS]

Top speed was 70, not 75, but they were artificially limited to 50 mph.

Top speed now is in the region of 0 mph, of course. :P

The restriction was purely on paper as far as I know - there was no OTMR and no actual physical or electrical speed limiter to stop the train ops exceeding that if they so desired. Obviously with consequences if caught, but it was possible.

 

[bluegoblin7]

Taken during the Last A Stock Railtour at the end of September...

 

[Chris125]

As for retaining a unit as an active "railtour" special, obviously even for existing stock such as the 1938 unit this will become increasingly tricky as the newer signalling systems get installed- but at least the 1938 unit (and the Standard Stock unit that's being slowly worked on) can physically fit everywhere.

I believe Bombardier's SSL resignalling contract includes cab equipment for heritage trains, though i've seen no details of which ones.

Chris

 

[jopsuk]

I believe Bombardier's SSL resignalling contract includes cab equipment for heritage trains, though i've seen no details of which ones.

Chris

Fair enough- but they're not also going to have the Victoria Line signalling system, the Jubilee system, the Central Line system, whatever gets fitted to the Northern Line, yet another for the Bakerloo and a further one (hopefully in this case just the SSL system) for the Picadilly.

 

[D365]

Would it be realistically feasible to run tours on those, considering how tightly intergrated the intense lines are with their stock, e.g. Jubilee platform doors not coping with 6 and 7 car trains simultaneously.

 

[HSTEd]

The only way subsurface stock is getting use anywhere is if a new mass transit system on a disused track bed needs electric stock on the cheap. Even then it is likely that only D-stock would be used as it is in the best condition.

Anyone got any suggestions?

 

[Manchester77]

If a new mass rapid transit system was built and they were looking for trains then how about the 1992 stock?
If rumours of Next Generation Tube Stock replacing it then instead of going to scrap that could be used. But then you have the whole issue of the trains being quite small, 4th rail and the ato thing.

 

[HSTEd]

Best place for tube stock would be on the Isle of Wight, especially if any of those plans to extend the Island Line back to its original southern terminus come to fruition.