1992 stock Refurbishment?

[Russel]

Peeling paint doesn't prevent a train from running in the here and now; knackered motors flashing over and failure to meet RVAR will.

The main problem was the failure to get this wrapped up years ago and the glacial pace of CLIP works - now, TfL don't have the time (let alone the budget) to do a full refurb.

I do agree.

But, I also think it's another example of managed decline, can kicking and penny pinching.

 

[southern442]

I do agree.

But, I also think it's another example of managed decline, can kicking and penny pinching.

None of those things are a decision by TfL in any way.

 

[Russel]

None of those things are a decision by TfL in any way.

I didn't say it was.

 

[southern442]

I didn't say it was.

But there has been a lot of criticism directed towards the job itself, when actually the job itself has always had an extremely limited amount of money - it is much less about a refresh for the trains and more of a life extension. The simple answer as to why (largely) aesthetic issues (granted, an important part of the outward-facing railway) haven't been dealt with is because they haven't been allowed the budget for it really.

 

[bramling]

But there has been a lot of criticism directed towards the job itself, when actually the job itself has always had an extremely limited amount of money - it is much less about a refresh for the trains and more of a life extension. The simple answer as to why (largely) aesthetic issues (granted, an important part of the outward-facing railway) haven't been dealt with is because they haven't been allowed the budget for it really.

That’s exactly it. This isn’t a “we’ve allocated budget to improve the experience for the passenger” job, it’s a “spend the minimum to stop the trains falling apart, and if we can manage to fit the odd bit of nice stuff in then we’ll see what we can do” job.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jan 2026 ==

I do agree.

But, I also think it's another example of managed decline, can kicking and penny pinching.

There’s a lot of can kicking in TFL. Bear in mind that TFL management is very transient nowadays, it’s very easy for issues to be left to be someone else’s problem, not helped by being tied to political cycles.

If this work wasn’t done to the 92 stock then there is a very real possibility the stock would have reached a point of being unviable to operate.

 

[Brooke]

I finally experienced one of the finished CLIP trains today.

I was impressed with parts of the customer experience: digital signage, refreshed seat covers, some new flooring in places, quieter motors(?).

Most incongruous for me wasn’t the bare paint and corrosion, but that the collapsed seat bases are still under the new seat covers!

Personally I would prefer the filthy old seat cover with a new base, rather than a clean-looking but unusable seat.

Also, I was bemused to see that all the scratched and acid graffiti was still in place, but presumably fixing that is also out of scope.

 

[xtmw]

The project extends the life of the 92 stock till 2040, so no, no new trains anytime soon.

 

[Mikey C]

The project extends the life of the 92 stock till 2040, so no, no new trains anytime soon.

Surely they will be replaced before then? If the Bakerloo line trains follow the Piccadilly Line trains, then they'll be finished by the early 2030s.

In a way the Central Line refurb work falls between two stools. A comparative waste of money if the fleet is replaced in the early 2030s, but also not the comprehensive total refurbishment needed if they are to last much longer.

 

[NCT]

If CLIP makes the 92 stock mechanically sound into 2040, then I'm sure money can be found around 2030 for a cosmetic refurbishment. It's pretty clear that the 2020s will be a sh!t decade, a combination of Tory hangover, Covid disruptions, and disruptions during renewal.

 

[Recessio]

Presumably TfL would hope to make a financial saving through better reliability (more trains=more passengers=more revenue?) and particularly decreased maintenence costs - is this expected to actually cover the cost of the CLIP?

My understanding was that when the SWR 455s had their big traction overhaul, it actually paid for itself in the long run through cost savings.

 

[xtmw]

I'm sure this has been said multiple times, but if CLIP weren't to happen it would be a disaster for the trains. I doubt a full service could be run if this weren't to happen.

CLIP has seen Acton Works being built, bring lots of jobs and not to mention when the project is finished, Acton Works will be used for the 95 or 96TS (can't remember which?)

I also think it's worth mentioning that the 92s are half-way through their operating life and all trains are tinkered in some way with regards to an overhaul...

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jan 2026 ==

If CLIP makes the 92 stock mechanically sound into 2040

CLIP has been very encouraging with regards to reliability, there have been some issues with the train but it is a massive improvement to what is already there.

 

[announcements]

But also what else are they to do? If they can't even get the Bakerloo stock replaced, then a 92 replacement isn't happening soon enough - they have to do something to the 92s before the reliability falls off a cliff.

You say that but there was a proposal some years ago to let the 1992 stock get replaced first before the Bakerloo and Picc.

 

[boiledbeans2]

Presumably TfL would hope to make a financial saving through better reliability (more trains=more passengers=more revenue?) and particularly decreased maintenence costs - is this expected to actually cover the cost of the CLIP?

My understanding was that when the SWR 455s had their big traction overhaul, it actually paid for itself in the long run through cost savings.

TfL is unable to think long term. They are only thinking about how to save money now, i.e., kicking maintenance/overhauls into the long grass. It will come back to bite them in years to come. In fact, previous bad decisions are already biting them now...

 

[bramling]

TfL is unable to think long term. They are only thinking about how to save money now, i.e., kicking maintenance/overhauls into the long grass. It will come back to bite them in years to come. In fact, previous bad decisions are already biting them now...

100% this.

What doesn’t help is that the management structure of TFL is so transient. There’s no incentive to think long-term, as kicking the can down the road is simply making it someone else’s problem. If there was an element of management continuity then there would be less incentive to do this.

 

[Russel]

TfL is unable to think long term. They are only thinking about how to save money now, i.e., kicking maintenance/overhauls into the long grass. It will come back to bite them in years to come. In fact, previous bad decisions are already biting them now...

This is far from unique to TfL though to be fair, it extends back the DfT and central Government.

 

[southern442]

I'd suspect that this kind of attitude at TfL is a symptom of a wider problem, which is that they are effectively held to ransom by central government, being fed investment in little drips and drabs.

 

[Thirteen]

I would assume that once the 2024 stock is introduced on the Piccadilly and Bakerloo, the next stock replacement is the 1992, 1995 and 1996 stock and it'd be more cost effective to replace those in one go.

 

[bramling]

I would assume that once the 2024 stock is introduced on the Piccadilly and Bakerloo, the next stock replacement is the 1992, 1995 and 1996 stock and it'd be more cost effective to replace those in one go.

Potentially, though TFL isn’t able to make serious plans that far ahead.

There are a number of variables.

Firstly the signalling on the Central Line is likely to need renewal at some point and this would ideally need to be tied in with the fleet replacement - this is all a massive headache, and definitely something easy to place in the “someone else’s problem” box.

Secondly there’s Piccadilly resignalling to pay for.

The other issue is that the Jubilee fleet is starting to run into issues, and may well reach the stage of needing a remedial programme, which by the time the 92 stock is finished will be virtually 35 years old.

It worth a bet that the Bakerloo fleet will see 60 years in service, and if things continue on the current path the 95 stock could end up being pretty long lasting.

 

[xtmw]

Firstly the signalling on the Central Line is likely to need renewal at some point and this would ideally need to be tied in with the fleet replacement - this is all a massive headache, and definitely something easy to place in the “someone else’s problem” box.

I was speaking to Central line control not long ago, and they were under the assumption that CBTC (if that's what TfL choose to go with and there isn't some brand new swanky system!) wouldn't come with new trains, rather optimised to work on the existing signalling.

There's also a signal renewal programme currently active on the Central, being delivered by Siemens.

 

[JCO1406]

How many refurbished units are there now?

 

[GFE]

There are 4 trains completed and recommissioned for service & the next one is due in March. There are 2 timetable paths each weekday peak which are suitable and often allocated for these trains/qualified operators.

 

[Chriso]

As a daily user I have to say I think there great. I just hope they can keep them looking good.

They seem to be finally getting on top of the internal graffiti problem on the 92/72 stock which is great to see.

 

[southern442]

As a daily user I have to say I think there great. I just hope they can keep them looking good.

They seem to be finally getting on top of the internal graffiti problem on the 92/72 stock which is great to see.

Yes although in the case of the 72 stock it has been rather unfortunately accompanied by an uptick in external graffiti! Poor bakerloo can't catch a break.

 

[bramling]

I was speaking to Central line control not long ago, and they were under the assumption that CBTC (if that's what TfL choose to go with and there isn't some brand new swanky system!) wouldn't come with new trains, rather optimised to work on the existing signalling.

The answer to that is probably that no one has really thought that far ahead.

There's also a signal renewal programme currently active on the Central, being delivered by Siemens.

The work on the signalling, like the trains, is essentially life extension works. As with the trains, the signalling is starting to age, and is running into obsolescence issues. Resignalling the Central Line is so far down the list of pressing issues that I don’t think it has been given too much thought how it might be done. But at some stage this will be another thing that TFL can no longer kick the can down the road.

 

[Mikey C]

Potentially, though TFL isn’t able to make serious plans that far ahead.

There are a number of variables.

Firstly the signalling on the Central Line is likely to need renewal at some point and this would ideally need to be tied in with the fleet replacement - this is all a massive headache, and definitely something easy to place in the “someone else’s problem” box.

Secondly there’s Piccadilly resignalling to pay for.

The other issue is that the Jubilee fleet is starting to run into issues, and may well reach the stage of needing a remedial programme, which by the time the 92 stock is finished will be virtually 35 years old.

It worth a bet that the Bakerloo fleet will see 60 years in service, and if things continue on the current path the 95 stock could end up being pretty long lasting.

At some point I can see some swaps between the Jubilee and Northern lines, and replacement stock for one of the lines. Both the 95s and 96s are intensively used, passenger numbers are growing, and presumably stock availability will start to decline. Just retractioning the 96s won't create any more trains.

Plus, if the Northern Line is finally split to enable more trains to be run, then they won't be able to this with the existing stock. Maybe the Northern could get replacement trains, and a few 95s reformed into 7 car units to run additional trains on the Jubilee? Or the Jubilee gets new trains, with a few 96s reformed into 6 car units for the Northern Line?

 

[GFE]

The answer to that is probably that no one has really thought that far ahead.


The work on the signalling, like the trains, is essentially life extension works. As with the trains, the signalling is starting to age, and is running into obsolescence issues. Resignalling the Central Line is so far down the list of pressing issues that I don’t think it has been given too much thought how it might be done. But at some stage this will be another thing that TFL can no longer kick the can down the road.

Siemens have been quite proactive in tackling the "can kicking" by reminding LUL of the increasing difficulties in supporting repairs and replacement modules for the central line signalling and getting associated funding and commitment to a longer term joint framework/plan. So yes the Life extension project funded resources in Siemens to investigate obsolesce detail, progress solutions together with implementing of some of the most urgent (which is nearing completion).
There is apparently some longer term joint strategy (CSIP) to retain this resource to resolve further obsolescence and progressively morph the system in preparation for new trains & CBTC in circa 15 years. The next stage of this appears to be a design requirements document for quote later this year.

 

[Recessio]

In a recent news article about a proposed service extension to Ongar, TfL commented on the progress (or lack thereof) on CLIP:

TfL rules out reviving 'lost' Tube stop as locals claim it's 'real opportunity'

Ongar station was shut in 1994 due to only 85 passengers using it each day

www.mylondon.news

The Central line is currently undergoing a £500m project to refurbish all 80 trains of the rundown fleet. So far, four trains have been revamped and brought back into service, with current plans to complete the programme by the end of 2029.

At Tuesday's meeting Mr Jabbal admitted TfL is lagging behind on this revamp scheme, adding that 10 Central line trains should have been refurbished by now. However, due to motor failure issues on dozens of trains, engineers were briefly forced to change their priorities to prevent stretches of the line being out of action.

Seems to be a bit of a nasty Catch-22: the trains are increasingly unreliable, so they have to spend more time repairing them, but that means you can't do the refurb to make them more reliable....

 

[GFE]

The comment "My London" reported Mr Jabbal to have made at the Epping council meeting regarding the delays to the 92 refurb program is rather inconsistent with the TFl line;
The initial delays in the design & development phase were blamed on COVID and suppliers going bust.
Subsequent delays in implementing the upgrade (rate of trains coming out of refurb) has been blamed on the distraction of resources to separately and urgently undertake Essential Heavy overhaul (DOPL) which had become due because of the delays in CLIP.

 

[bramling]

The comment Mr Jabbal made regarding the delays to the 92 refurb program is rather inconsistent with the previous TFl line;
The initial delays in the design & development phase were blamed on COVID and suppliers going bust.
Subsequent delays in implementing the upgrade (rate of trains coming out of refurb) has been blamed on the distraction of resources to separately and urgently undertake Essential Heavy overhaul (DOPL) which had become due because of the delays in CLIP.

This is what happens when the can has been kicked too far down the road, to the point where TFL are at the mercy of events.

 

[Russel]

This is what happens when the can has been kicked too far down the road, to the point where TFL are at the mercy of events.

Indeed, things should never have been allowed to get this bad.

But this is what years of LU, TFL and successive Governments can kicking, blame passing and poor decisions leads to.