London Banter - View Single Post

Stephen O'Connell[_3_]

wrote:

Visually iconic maybe - but talk to any fleet engineer and you won't
hear the same. They were notoriously unreliable from the word go,
right from the very start. When new they never attained the
reliability of the late builds of ''standard'' (or pre-38 stock if
prefer that term), and by 1960s ''standards'' were actually much more
reliable. Just about the only advantage to operators of 38s was no
equipment compartments above floor taking up space.

Unreliable? Yet some of them are still operating on the Isle of Weight
some 60 years after they were built! If that's unreliable, I hope I
still am at that age!!! :-)

Also IMHO the layman easily confuses 38s with 59s and 62s - they do
look very similar externally and internally. I wonder how many ''fond
memories'' of 38s are actualy not 38s at all.

I'm pretty sure the average punter was incapable of telling the
difference between a SR 4Sub and 4EPB or between 12ICBC and 12Rep/TC
and even nright at the end of SR Mk.1 there were still ''enthusiats''
incapble of determing Veps and Cigs other than by numbers. 38s and
62s they had no hope unless primed with red and aluminuim colours - I
bet they'd not know the details.

The curve of the roof at the front of the train would give it away as a
38. The 59 and 62's (and the three 56's) were different to look at from
the front, as the destination blind was at the top in the roof, although
the insides were similar. The 38's used to have the five headcode lights
too. But yes, people not interested in Underground trains might confuse
them.

I'm still fond of those trains!