Was the introduction of the 2009TS smooth?

[RacsoMoquette]

How was the introduction of the 2009TS I don’t seem to remember it taking as long as the 2024TS. After they had their sensitive door troubles they settled down to be very reliable and dependable trains which they still are today, though they are crying out for a referbishemnt. After over fifteen years of intensive use on the Victoria Line.

 

[Silent]

How was the introduction of the 2009TS I don’t seem to remember it taking as long as the 2024TS. After they had their sensitive door troubles they settled down to be very reliable and dependable trains which they still are today, though they are crying out for a referbishemnt. After over fifteen years of intensive use on the Victoria Line.

I think new trains seem to take longer to go into service. I remember it being smoother but then there wasn’t as much social media coverage to point out a late launch. I think class 378 was a bit late into service however class 710s was at least a year late.

But 2009 ts look much more conventional than 2024 ts so it’s understandable it was a smoother launch.

 

[bramling]

How was the introduction of the 2009TS I don’t seem to remember it taking as long as the 2024TS. After they had their sensitive door troubles they settled down to be very reliable and dependable trains which they still are today, though they are crying out for a referbishemnt. After over fifteen years of intensive use on the Victoria Line.

Depends on your definition of smooth. There was a lot of testing of the prototypes, which ultimately led to the two pre-production trains being scrapped and replaced.

However yes from a passenger point of view once they were in service it all went fairly smoothly, apart from the sensitive edge as you mentioned.

If anything the S stock took longer to settle down.

 

[RacsoMoquette]

Depends on your definition of smooth. There was a lot of testing of the prototypes, which ultimately led to the two pre-production trains being scrapped and replaced.

However yes from a passenger point of view once they were in service it all went fairly smoothly, apart from the sensitive edge as you mentioned.

If anything the S stock took longer to settle down.

It seemed like an awful waste to scrap them, surely they could have been heavily modified to be compatible with the production fleet.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Tuesday at 16:38 ==

It even says here that the trains introduction was ahead of schedule being “Two Years Early”

 

[TFN]

There was a lot of testing of the prototypes, which ultimately led to the two pre-production trains being scrapped and replaced.

Our of curiosity, what differences were there between the prototypes and the final product?

 

[Silent]

Our of curiosity, what differences were there between the prototypes and the final product?

I’m not sure but I’m pretty sure there are minor differences in the interior. I’m guessing the final product is more practical or more disability friendly as I’m sure the dot matrix display is a bit different and also the grab rails by the doors and the plastic casing.

 

[starlight73]

According to another forum it was cheaper to scrap the prototypes and build two new trains, than refit them to specification.

2009 stock | District Dave's London Underground Site

Am I right in thinking that there is no train numbered 21001/02 and 21003/04?

districtdavesforum.co.uk

If you think about the amount of time CLIP has spent dealing with complicated modifications on the central line at the prototyping stage … (although of course it’s probably not the same)

 

[bramling]

Our of curiosity, what differences were there between the prototypes and the final product?

Can’t answer this I’m afraid, however I know it was widely started at the time that the cost and/or complexity of modifying the trains made is easier and/or cheaper to simply build two from scratch. Presumably some parts were able to be re-used.

At least one of the pre-production trains ended up at Spadeadam alongside the Potters Bar 365 vehicles.

ISTR the S stock has or certainly had two trains with very slightly different traction packages for similar reasons. Others may be able to comment further, however there is definitely some truth in this as the two trains did, and may still, sound slightly different.

 

[xtmw]

Tim O Toole S Stock has the 'different' traction motor sounds

21359

 

[Nym]

Can’t answer this I’m afraid, however I know it was widely started at the time that the cost and/or complexity of modifying the trains made is easier and/or cheaper to simply build two from scratch. Presumably some parts were able to be re-used.

At least one of the pre-production trains ended up at Spadeadam alongside the Potters Bar 365 vehicles.

ISTR the S stock has or certainly had two trains with very slightly different traction packages for similar reasons. Others may be able to comment further, however there is definitely some truth in this as the two trains did, and may still, sound slightly different.

The list of what IS the same is shorter.

Bogies, Traction Equipment, some MITRAC modules, is about it really.

 

[Dstock7080]

Tim O Toole S Stock has the 'different' traction motor sounds

21359

“Tim O’Toole” is current S8 21099/21000. Originally a 7-car pre-production test train delivered 21/10/2009.

 

[Nym]

“Tim O’Toole” is current S8 21099/21000. Originally a 7-car pre-production test train delivered 21/10/2009.

Also one of the ATMS units then with laser geometry, video inspection and other test equipment on the underside of 23099.

Same equipment that is fitted to the last two 2009TS to be built, 11001 and 11003.