1990s LU Stock Referbishments

[RacsoMoquette]

Hello, in this thread I thought it would be of interest to discuss in-depth regarding the 1990s referbishement of Tube Stocks. I thought we could think about trial interior referbs and companies carrying out the referbs.
Firstly I am interested to know had RFS Industries not entered receivership and did perform the 1973TS refurbishment. Would they have fitted a completely different interior design? As the contract was quickly passed to Bombardier Prorail in Wakefield to complete the program. I am interested to know weather the refurbishment outcome would be similar to that of the C Stock also refurbished by RFS? Or was RFS to refurbish the interior via a strict program and therefore Bombardier took said contract over? Also why was RFS selected for the 1973TS refurbishment instead of Tickford Rosyth akin to the 1967/72TS? Because the prototype referb with luggage racks appeared to be quite similar visually to the refurbished 1967/72TS.

 

[RacsoMoquette]

Also it occurred to me, why did TFL wish to have differant companies carrying out the referbishement? Why didn’t they just stick with one company for all Stocks? It seemed rather complicated having Tickford Rosyth, RFS Industries and Bombardier? Also did TFL ever produce any trial referb mock-ups for the 1967 and 1972Mk2? As they did release some trial interior photos for the 1973TS and even interior mock ups for the 1996/1995TS?

I would say that I personal favorite interior referb was the Tickford/Rosyth one for the 1967/72s The original referbished interior ambiance was very pleasant indeed, especially the very nice round porthole lights at the end of the cars! My next interest is haven’t the latter referbished said fleets, what may have the finished product looked like today? E.g if RFS had won said Stock referub, would it may have looked akin to that of the C Stock? Or not? But and query’s?

 

[Dstock7080]

Also did TFL ever produce any trial referb mock-ups for the 1967 and 1972Mk2? As they did release some trial interior photos for the 1973TS and even interior mock ups for the 1996/1995TS?

Yes there were trial refurbishment cars of A, C, 1967 unveiled at an Acton Works press event on 13 September 1989.
The trial refurb ‘67/‘72 were done by Vic Berry of Leicester

 

[danielnez1]

I am guessing LUL was required to contract out to competitive tender the main refurbishment programs for their fleets, and it was required to be done on a line by line basis, as each fleet had different requirements (and with the likes of the A60/62 stock was not expected to be around as long).

I wonder if the subsequent extra heavy refurb of the 1973 tube stock (that included a lot of similar fittings and features of the then new new 1995/96 tube stock) was due to the fact those trains served Heathrow, so needed to be a bit more "prestigious"?

 

[100andthirty]

67TS prototype contract was let to Tickford/Vic Berry using a design by Jones Garrard. The production contract for 67/72TS was also let to Tickford/Vic Berry, but after the demise of the Vic Berry company the works were done at Babcock Rosyth Royal Dockyard.
C stock prototype was produced by BREL to their design. LU decided to engage Creactive Design to redo the interior and the contract was let to RFS in Doncaster
A stock Prototype was produced by Metro Cammell. This was seen as too expensive and a less comprehensive package was let to BREL
73TS interior was designed by Warwich Design (as far as I remember). The contract was let to RFS, but was taken over by Bombardier after RFS collapsed.
The interior design was carried out under LU's direction and was implemented by the chosen suppliers.
As others have said, the use of a variety of suppliers was because these were contracts costing many tens of millions of pounds so it was inevitable that competitive tenders would be called for. There was also a matter of capacity for suppliers to take on work.

 

[Mikey C]

Also it occurred to me, why did TFL wish to have differant companies carrying out the referbishement? Why didn’t they just stick with one company for all Stocks? It seemed rather complicated having Tickford Rosyth, RFS Industries and Bombardier? Also did TFL ever produce any trial referb mock-ups for the 1967 and 1972Mk2? As they did release some trial interior photos for the 1973TS and even interior mock ups for the 1996/1995TS?

I would say that I personal favorite interior referb was the Tickford/Rosyth one for the 1967/72s The original referbished interior ambiance was very pleasant indeed, especially the very nice round porthole lights at the end of the cars! My next interest is haven’t the latter referbished said fleets, what may have the finished product looked like today? E.g if RFS had won said Stock referub, would it may have looked akin to that of the C Stock? Or not? But and query’s?

The porthole lights looked very nice, but the windows at the end which the other refurbished trains got were a major safety improvement.

 

[MatthewRead]

67TS prototype contract was let to Tickford/Vic Berry using a design by Jones Garrard. The production contract for 67/72TS was also let to Tickford/Vic Berry, but after the demise of the Vic Berry company the works were done at Babcock Rosyth Royal Dockyard.
C stock prototype was produced by BREL to their design. LU decided to engage Creactive Design to redo the interior and the contract was let to RFS in Doncaster
A stock Prototype was produced by Metro Cammell. This was seen as too expensive and a less comprehensive package was let to BREL
73TS interior was designed by Warwich Design (as far as I remember). The contract was let to RFS, but was taken over by Bombardier after RFS collapsed.
The interior design was carried out under LU's direction and was implemented by the chosen suppliers.
As others have said, the use of a variety of suppliers was because these were contracts costing many tens of millions of pounds so it was inevitable that competitive tenders would be called for. There was also a matter of capacity for suppliers to take on work.

67TS prototype contract was let to Tickford/Vic Berry using a design by Jones Garrard. The production contract for 67/72TS was also let to Tickford/Vic Berry, but after the demise of the Vic Berry company the works were done at Babcock Rosyth Royal Dockyard.
C stock prototype was produced by BREL to their design. LU decided to engage Creactive Design to redo the interior and the contract was let to RFS in Doncaster
A stock Prototype was produced by Metro Cammell. This was seen as too expensive and a less comprehensive package was let to BREL
73TS interior was designed by Warwich Design (as far as I remember). The contract was let to RFS, but was taken over by Bombardier after RFS collapsed.
The interior design was carried out under LU's direction and was implemented by the chosen suppliers.
As others have said, the use of a variety of suppliers was because these were contracts costing many tens of millions of pounds so it was inevitable that competitive tenders would be called for. There was also a matter of capacity for suppliers to take on work.

Out of interest how long did they last in service I only know the 1973 one lasted for 5 and a half years from 20th January 1991-10th September 1996 and the D stock one lasted from July 2002 - November 2007. What about those other aforementioned trains anyone know how long they lasted for?

 

[Helvellyn]

Hello, in this thread I thought it would be of interest to discuss in-depth regarding the 1990s referbishement of Tube Stocks. I thought we could think about trial interior referbs and companies carrying out the referbs.
Firstly I am interested to know had RFS Industries not entered receivership and did perform the 1973TS refurbishment. Would they have fitted a completely different interior design? As the contract was quickly passed to Bombardier Prorail in Wakefield to complete the program. I am interested to know weather the refurbishment outcome would be similar to that of the C Stock also refurbished by RFS? Or was RFS to refurbish the interior via a strict program and therefore Bombardier took said contract over? Also why was RFS selected for the 1973TS refurbishment instead of Tickford Rosyth akin to the 1967/72TS? Because the prototype referb with luggage racks appeared to be quite similar visually to the refurbished 1967/72TS.

I'll have to dig out a book I have on the Underground stock that covers trial refurbishments and liveries. Both the and D stock trial refurbishments were a lot more comprehensive than what was ultimately delivered but the early 1990s down-turn saw a lot of budgets trimmed back.

If I recall the '73 stock was refurbished in a way that was designed to allow pretty much a similar scheme to be used on the '83 stock, which had been proposed to be retained on the Jubilee Line with some new stock, then a cascade to augment the '73 stock. Neither scheme came off.

 

[announcements]

Does anyone have any images / know any details about the 1972MkI stock? I heard it was similar to the 1967/1972MkII stock refurbs but the grab poles were in "charcoal". I believe only 3 units received such treatment.

 

[bramling]

Does anyone have any images / know any details about the 1972MkI stock? I heard it was similar to the 1967/1972MkII stock refurbs but the grab poles were in "charcoal". I believe only 3 units received such treatment.

The interior was very similar to the Bakerloo and Victoria lines. The main differences were fixtures were in charcoal rather than brown/blue, the wall panelling had a different pattern, and the moquette was different. The kick plates on the doors may also have been a different colour, and I think the floor was different.

Some of the units still seeing service on the Bakerloo Line retain some tell-tale signs of these differences.

 

[announcements]

How intriguing - I wonder if there are any photographs out there of it!

Also, at the time they thought black was the worst colour for accessibility and so went for grapefruit yellow on the '95s (and '96s). Of course, thinking has moved on, and black is used for the Elizabeth line.

 

[Dstock7080]

How intriguing - I wonder if there are any photographs out there of it!

A previous thread on this subject had a picture:

Does anyone have any interior footage of the three fully refurbished 1972Mk1 stock cars on the Northern Line?

Hi all, I am aware that three six car units of 1972Mk1 Stock on the Northern Line received a full refurbishment by Tickford Rail at Rosyth Royal Dockyard. In the mid to late 1990s akin to the similar style refurbishment of the 1967TS and later the 1972Mk2 TS. However it was soon to be abolished...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[RacsoMoquette]

Also on the ex Northern Line refurbished cars of Mk1 stock now on the Bakerloo, another telltale sign apart from the side wall pattern, is the overhead fan housing, instead it has a pattern in the shape of the letter “X” as the dividers are far move bulbous than the Bakerloo referb mk2.

Also I seem to remember that the ex Mk1 cars refurbished for the Northern Line, though now in the Bakerloo, had a slightly different sounding door chime, maybe it was just one particular unit of Mk1 though it seemed much of a lower pitch and less akin to rushing high pitched air as they sounded on pretty much all the refurbished tube stocks of the period!

As the doors close at Piccadilly Circus, the different door chime is evident.

 

[announcements]

A previous thread on this subject had a picture:

Does anyone have any interior footage of the three fully refurbished 1972Mk1 stock cars on the Northern Line?

Hi all, I am aware that three six car units of 1972Mk1 Stock on the Northern Line received a full refurbishment by Tickford Rail at Rosyth Royal Dockyard. In the mid to late 1990s akin to the similar style refurbishment of the 1967TS and later the 1972Mk2 TS. However it was soon to be abolished...

www.railforums.co.uk

Thanks for sharing. The photograph portrays the poles in the foreground as being almost blue like the Victoria line, rather than charcoal grey; whereas in the background of the image they do appear to be a black-grey.

 

[Transilien]

If I recall the '73 stock was refurbished in a way that was designed to allow pretty much a similar scheme to be used on the '83 stock, which had been proposed to be retained on the Jubilee Line with some new stock, then a cascade to augment the '73 stock. Neither scheme came off.

Was the ‘83 stock planned to run on the Piccadilly line then?

 

[bramling]

Was the ‘83 stock planned to run on the Piccadilly line then?

There was a tentative plan that the second batch of 83 stock could be redeployed to provide extra services on the Piccadilly Line. I’m not sure how serious this proposal was, as it was never really explained what the uplift on the Piccadilly would entail, nor how the signalling or depots would be able to support it.

Many of the batch 2 units were stored at Piccadilly Line locations, however this may have been a coincidende.

 

[Transilien]

There was a tentative plan that the second batch of 83 stock could be redeployed to provide extra services on the Piccadilly Line. I’m not sure how serious this proposal was, as it was never really explained what the uplift on the Piccadilly would entail, nor how the signalling or depots would be able to support it.

Many of the batch 2 units were stored at Piccadilly Line locations, however this may have been a coincidende.

Yes it seems pointless seeing as the Piccadilly can cope with only the ‘73 stock fine even now.