Get an exclusive Surfshark deal! Enter promo code JAGO for an extra 3 months free at surfshark.deals/jago Tube train design - we’ve come a long way, baby. Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/jagohazzard Patreon: / jagohazzard
I'm passionate about engineering. To me, any solution that is inexpensive, reliable and not immediately obvious is "fascinating." Of course, there was no need to make the door tops circular, except to serve a need to make the door attractive when closed.
@@ROCKINGMAN Square tunnels at depths of 70' would have taken considerably longer for a tunnelling machine to drill through London Clay than a cylindrical one.
A point of correction to my Hon Friend. The 1973 stock as built did indeed have transverse seating in the middle of the car. When I was crew on the Piccadilly Line working a night turn we had a few hours in the depot between arriving with one of the last trains and departing with one of the first the following morning. Four of the transverse seat cushions laid in the doorway made a tolerably comfortable bed, err allegedly.
@@quantisedspace7047 But they are so off-putting when one's on the way back from the opera or the Malthusian Society meeting and attempting to partake of that splendid reserve edition Dunning Kruger champagne!
I’m a casual viewer who likes learning about the Tube’s interiors. Also, Geoff did a video on the Tube Interiors as well. The more discourse, the merrier.
It's important to note that the 1973 stock, pre-refurbishment, did still have transverse seating, and that - depending on the way you see the 1986 stock - the 1992 stock was in fact the first modern tube stock with fully longitudinal seating (1986 Green and Red did have fully longitudinal seating too, however Blue did not).
Another correction to note regarding the 1973 stock is that there's a wider space at all doors specifically to accommodate luggage, not the use of transverse seating as asserted by JH. They also featured 'dual-level' arm rests, something removed in the refurbishment.
It's wild to think that bench seating along the walls and class distinction elimination took many decades to come to fruition. These are such small but simple changes. It doesn't take much to move the seats just 90 degrees.
I know that Stockholm subway has (even mostly I think) seating arranged in the "train" way. The sideway seating is quite uncomfortable (as pointed out in the video) so if you don't really need to cram in five people wide standing (as famously in many Japanese cities) even during rush hour, I believe comfort will trump capacity.
Frankly I am sorry that the modern trains offer no option at all for transverse/sideways seating for fairly long journeys on the District, Central and Piccadilly lines and the Overground, as it offers much better views. The Metropolitan Line and Elizabeth Line do offer a modest amount of transverse seating.
It seems more likely that the point of an uncomfortable third class was pretty much the same as for the present day uncomfortable economy class in airliners - to encourage those who can afford to to pay more.
Hi Jago - I’d like to see a review of the lighting technology used over time on the underground - or is that too deep a rabbit-hole? I recall trains with real round light bulbs, but 110 volt I think to make them less attractive to being stolen? Of course fluorescent lights, but sometimes fed with from high frequency inverters / motor generators and making a jolly whining noise. They also used to make swirling patterns when they aged that varied with motor loading. And latterly I guess LED lights, including odd colours by the doors etc. There - I’ve almost written the script for you!
Nice video Jago... My personal favourite interior design on the Underground was the old Metropolitan A-Stock; the pre-refurbishment style with early 1960s high-backed seats (black/grey/red moquette)- and of course luggage racks! Miss those old, cosy styles....
I commuted between Liverpool Street and Great Portland Road when they switched over from the A stock to the modern trains, and I was *not* sorry to see the old trains go. They were awful during the rush hour, with their layout making it particularly difficult to get off. From what I can remember, they were also uncomfortable in (a) cold and (b) hot weather.
If anyone's wondering why 2183, I think it's because the Met is 160 years old (1863), he covered 160 years of history. So 160 years from now is 2183. (The Tube will be 320 years old by then; 160*2 = 320.)
One of the reasons for longitudinal seating is to allow the tops of the wheels to poke above the floor (which is why the 72 stock has crossways seats in the middle, but not over the wheels)
I know why you were hired to chase that man: he stole your mentions of the A, C, and D stock from the subsurface lines! :) (I kid. I love seeing this kind of thorough but quick evolution of how the Tube stock came to be.) Thanks again, Jago!
As a londoner i’ve always wondered why some trains have seats along the wall and why some have them facing each other. This has been a fascinating insight into how we’ve got where we are. Now when I’m on my hour long Overground trip from one end of the line to the other I’ll be thinking about the “intended user” making a short journey as I’m jostled from side to side.
I grew up in North London and had occasion to make frequent trips to Barts Hospital in my early years from about 1956 onwards. Trolley bus (later superseded by Routemasters) to Wood Green and then the Piccadilly Line to Holborn -often fitting in a visit to Bassett Lowke's-shop on the way to the hospital. The tube trains must have been 1920's or 1930's stock. They were wonderful with lots of wood. I remember being fascinated by how the doors slid into the carriage structure as they opened.
Nice fusion of and update to the older videos about the early windowless carriages, gatemen, S class stock, and I think I spy snippets from a couple others too. Good work!
I find it interesting that the newer (60s and later?) stock looks altogether less lickable, but if you actually try it, the varnish on the old ones is significantly more disgusting than the modern plastics. I … used to be a small person.
That was easy to achieve because the Liverpool trains were of mainline height and width; unlike Tube Stock trains which are 30" lower in height, and a floor height that is 20" lower than 1892 Liverpool trains, thus nothing to do with Liverpudlians being better engineers
@@PSYCHIC_PSYCHO It has a lot to do with Liverpolitans being better engineers. Look at the City and South London trains. They had an electric *loco!* The City & South London was an all new railway. The train design was not constrained it was a blank sheet design. The Liverpool trains were a world away from them. They look like modern trains they were so advanced. *The world's first EMUs.* If London was building a new elevated electric railway, they would have had electric locos. To their credit, the Liverpolitans stood outside the box then thought. They even had a drivers window arranged to look back down the side of the train/platform. Simple. Brilliant. They even had the first ever signal lights. The Overhead trains also ran in tunnel. Dingle Station is underground. You sound bitter and twisted. Must be a Chelsea fan.
@@johnburns4017 The only reason why the Liverpool elevated railway trains looked more modern than the City & South London Railway trains is because the railway in Liverpool was built to a mainline loading gauge; as it was built above ground in open-air it was considerably cheaper to build. Whereas tunnelling shields used for drilling deep below ground were considerably more expensive as the technology was new, and so the larger the diameter of tunnels to be built the more expensive the railway, hence why it was decided that the tunnels for the C & SLR should be built to a small diameter to reduce costs, subsequently this cost saving exercise resulted in severe restrictions on the design of C&SLR; therefore your counter-argument is weak. Lastly, the deep-level Tube lines are a modern section of London Underground network, the old section of London Underground network is made of Victorian era routes that were built to a shallow depth of 5-6 metres below ground, thus are called 'Sub-Surface lines, and these trains were built to the same height and width of national rail trains including those in Liverpool. These shallow lines have always had more advanced technology and were of better design even in 1905 when they were electrified compared to what Liverpool had in the same period. The reason why public transport has always been considerably better in London is because London is the economic powerhouse of the U.K., whereas Liverpool is the diametric opposite of being a economic powerhouse, hence why no corporations are willing to invest in Liverpool because those companies won't see a return for their investment.
@@PSYCHIC_PSYCHO BTW, I am in London. This one must be from Manchester, by his sneers towards Liverpool. It is known they have an obsession with the city 30 miles away. I know how the City & South London railway was built. The Liverpool elevated railway was not built to mainline loading gauge at all. Run a full steam train onto that then it would collapse. The EMUs were built to a light construction as they were mainly on elevated sections. Initially made from wood, and then aluminium. Economics is not your strong point for sure. London is a massive success because on HMG money in mainly infrastructure and basing gvmt departments there. All others do not even figure.
@@johnburns4017 I said nothing that isn't factual about the U.K. economic system, it is a fact that London is the U.K. powerhouse as it generates wealth for the rest of the U.K. too. Secondly, my understanding of the term 'mainline loading gauge' is the track width, as well as the height and width of the trains, national rail trains have a height of 12', and a width of 9', trains of this size operate on the Liverpool's Mersey-Rail.
The tunnelling shield was invented by Marc Brunel and first used in the construction of the Thames Tunnel, between Wapping and Rotherhithe. Peter Barlow improved it almost out of recognition and held patents for a cylindrical shield but he never constructed a prototype. His pupil, James Henry Greathead improved on Barlow's idea and actually built a shield, which was used to construct the Tower Subway.
Hi there Jago, you missed out the 1959 Tube Stock, seven cars par a train, which was the first Tube Stock to feature unpainted aluminium bodysides and was delivered to the Piccadilly line. During the mid 1970s, the 1959 Tube Stock was replaced by 1973 Tube Stock, six cars per a train, which was specifically built for the Heathrow Airport extension. The 1959 Tube Stock was then cascaded onto the Northern line. You also missed out the similar 1962 Tube Stock, which was eight cars per a train and was introduced onto the Central line. Finally there is the 1995 Tube Stock, which was introduced onto the Northern line and the very similar 1996 Tube Stock, which was introduced onto the Jubilee line. Best wishes and take care. Kind regards, Peter Skuce, St Albans. Hertfordshire.
Hi Jago from Spain. My earliest (1957) use of the Metropolitan line used individual compartments with slam doors and it was a real cram-in when there was a match on at Wembley.
I loved the '20's stock, in particular the '27, according to the Metro-Cammell brass door footplates, on the Bakerloo until the '70's, pure early Art Deco, didn't even mind the fact that they shook, rattled and rolled.
I was wondering if anybody would mention or remember the 1927 pattern. In the early 1980s examples of this could still occasionally be seen in the middle of what was otherwise a 1938-type train; I used to look out for them. They could be recognised at some distance by the two-tier roof with a raised section along the centre; in addition, there were oval windows near the ends. The straps for standing passengers had loops instead of knobs. My favourite feature, however, was the petalled lampshades which would have been perfectly suited to a tea-shop in an Agatha Christie dramatisation.
Enjoyable, and enlightening; I agree with you that the Tower Subway deserves its place in the history of coaching stock, at least. Maybe the Metropolitan line F-stock deserve a mention - or even their own video?
Never forget that they took The 72TS Round Things from us. As an aside, the 72 Stock doesn’t have cab doors either, since it was made with the same bodyshell design as the 67TS.
"In 1920, the next big thing arrived on the piccadilly line", I half expected you to follow with "these are the trains that operate to this day on the Bakerloo line with only minor changes"
One detail I find fascinating is how hanging straps have gone in and out of fashion over the years. Piccadilly Line trains originally had them (well, more of a sprung ball than a strap) but they were removed when the trains were refurbished. By the time the S Stock came along, straps in the traditional style were back. Elizabeth Line trains (basically main line trains fitted out tube-train style) have them too. Some buses have them...and some don't. You'd think a definitive decision would have been made by now about whether straps are a good idea or not, but it seems to be down to which side of the bed the designer got out of that day.
Singapore meanwhile uses trapezoid-shaped grab handles hanging off these straps on its North East Line rolling stock, but when refurbishing the older trainsets (the C751As instead of C751Cs) it replaced them with rubber triangular grab handles nailed onto overhead horizontal metal grab poles, & are harder when pushed longitudinally. So while you're less likely to sway when holding onto these handles when the train accelerates/decelerates, you're also more likely to get a concussion if you knock into them when walking
I was curious as to how some tube trains had those hanging springy things with a ball shape at the bottom end to hold on to when standing all in grey while other tube trains had them all in black. As for windows in tunnels,they're for following the changes in the wires that run along the wall.
I think in tunnels the has a lot more noise than the older stock . The wood and formica side panels used deaden the load metalic noises heard in stock in later years
If you you go to that Tower Subway brick shaft head structure and look across Petty Wales (the name of the street) at, ironically, the Subway restaurant (which I would put money on being there completely coincidentally), you will see a CCTV camera above the front window. I set up that camera only last week (as of the day of this video's release).
Didn’t the wooden Metropolitan line carriages last until 1961 on trains serving Aylesbury and Watford? Before then, the locomotive had to be changed between electric and steam at Rickmansworth. I’m just about old enough to have seen them, but the trains didn’t go east of Baker Street outside peak hours. I can hardly believe that I would have needed to open the door to a compartment at, say, Euston Square.
I believe you're talking about the Metropolitan Railway "Dreadnought" stock, and yeah. '61 was the year the line was electrified to Amersham, and new stock was built for said services. It made the loco-hauled trains obsolete. The carriages were out of service by the end of the year, and so too were the "Metro-Vick" electrics that weren't relegated to departmental work. Can't imagine the tank engines lasted much longer It's funny, I got basically all of this from a Railway Roundabout segment in from their 1961 season, and those same Dreadnought coaches were shown the very next year as new stock on the Bluebell Railway
Been inside that City And South London Railway carriage, though "padded cell" was my immediate thought, it comes across to me as more garden shed than tube train personally.
@@philipwhiuk The line already has nicely working trains Engineers who manage the trains and repair any faults in the depot say they are very reliable workhorses.
My favourite tube trains were the oddly bell shaped District units, they had such a lovely olde worldey feel to them. The red ones seemed to better than the white or light grey ones but that was prob a kids fancy lol
Not sure if it's true but I heard that the outward curve at the bottom of "bell" shape was added as a psychological effort to make people step back from the platform edges to prevent their feet from being chopped off!
The red ones you mentioned were designated as CO/CP Stock and dated from 1937/38. The Aluminium ones had bodies of identical dimensions as the red ones but with detail differences and were designated as R Stock. I loved them both. As I am a London Underground enthusiast I have a private photo archive of my favourite Underground trains.
In New York City,the IRT was using Bowling Alley seating,i.e. longitudinal/bench seating,due to the nominal 9 foot wide cars! The BMT/BRT,introduced cross seating on the steels(AB,standards)because the earlier lines were considered suburban! Today the current rolling stock,plus that coming online still has the seating of the past! A most interesting parallel to London!! Thank you,Jago for another sidebar trip,that covers the fanny part of the Underground 🚇 👏! Thank you 😇!
The modern NYC cars have undifferentiated low shallow hard benches, an expression of their contempt for the passengers. Painful for sitting on, good for manspreading or lying down on for a nap. World's worse mass transit seating. An expensive consultancy figured out a better combination seating plan with doors in different places. They were ignored.
Modern trains seats even on the Tube are hard even with a cushion, because they aren't sprung like bed mattresses, like older train seats or stuffed with what sofas were stuffed with before the 1970s. I miss decent soft seating and even bus seating is harder now.
City and South London Stock. From the Padded Cell to Wooden Body with Windows and then Metal Body with Windows. There is still a wooden body with windows around which is 132 owned by the Suburban Electric Railway Association. Also 163 survives as a metal body with windows, this is owned by the LT Musuem.
I was literally looking for a video like this about a week ago as i was instrested in seeing just how the tube has evolved but couldnt find good videos on it and now i just saw this new video on it. What a coincidence.
I used to like that the old District Line trains had single doors to the Circle Line's double doors. When you were in a rush it saved time not having to check the displays. How did the single door train design come about?
It was thought it would save doorway space on longer distance lines with less need for rapid ingress/egress of passengers at most stations. There was also some Jubilee Line stock with single leaf doors around the same time. In retrospect it was felt to have been a mistake so all later trains were built with double leaf doors again.
@@PaddyWVThe single door concept came about when passenger numbers were declining, plus to save money it was decided that fewer door-engines would be needed for single-leaf doors which only require one door-engine for each door.
Fantastic overview there of the interiors, Jago. I still think the most comfortable seats, if not the ride (!) can be found on the elderly 72 stock on the bakerloo.
It's interesting that in Amsterdam, the M1/2/3/4 and S1/2/3 all had transverse seating. Starting the with the M5, which came into use in 2012, most seats are longitudinal, you can walk the entire six-car train, and it's air conditioned. It looks like they finally got the hint.
@@simonh6371 Could be worse. Could be Glasgow. 🙂 But another defining feature of the M5 metros is that the doors are extra high, so that the Dutch fit through them. As an average height Dutchman, I have to admit that the platforms and the deep-level trains were... interesting.
Meanwhile Singapore, which has used only longitudinal seating on its MRT rolling stock, has gone even further & completely removed seats from some sections of train cars, & sometimes replaced them with ever bigger ceiling-to-floor ads
When my family moved to Croxley in 1957, the Metropolitan line trains running in a cutting at the bottom of our garden were wooden, brown, slam-door compartmented trains, though I cannot remember ever travelling on one. I was still at school in London and travelled daily on the now-closed Croxley line via Watford High Street to Willesden Junction. By the time I started commuting into London on the Metropolitan line in 1963, these old carriages had been replaced with more modern all-aluminium stock.
When I drove buses another name for lateral seating was simply facing seats - above the front and rear wheels. My father says he used tube trains in the 50s, old stock of the time, with the gates at the end. I'd be interested in anyone with parents / grandparents who told them about using the tube earlier 20th century.
Don't forget that the real reason for longitudinal seating on a Tjbe train is somewhere for the wheels and that the seat riser over the bogies is the main structural member,
Loved this, Jago. My personal favorite from memory, is the old District Line Q stock, with their 3-seat longitudinal "snugs", pendant lights, and that gorgeous inlaid walnut panelling.
@@apolloc.vermouth5672 My guess is Leicester Square. After avoiding the "A" bomb in Wardour Street it's only a short distance to the tube station via Lisle Street and Little Newport Street, then on the Northern line down to Waterloo in time for the last train of the night back out to Woking.
The photo on the single sleeve was taken at Bond Street. The recording of the train was at St John's Wood. Whether or not either station was in fact open at midnight in 1978 is a matter for further research.
Third-Class passenger boarding a new, fully enclosed rail car for the first time: "Well, isn't this posh, it's got a roof, and everything!" Third-Class conductor: "That's right...Now sit down and shut your mouth, you filthy beggar, before I swat you a good one!"
