Talk:London Underground 2024 Stock

Driverless trains

I added information about safety of driverless metros in other countries (in the section about safety concerns over the new trains being driverless) but this was deleted by Alarics under the heading "RV editorialising" - can someone explain why this was or should I undo this action? Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 20:58, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

The sentences you added in two places to this article gave the impression that Wikipedia itself was taking a view that any opposition to driverless trains was unreasonable because such systems exist elsewhere. In fact it is all much more complicated than that. The comparison with automatic metros in other countries (or with the DLR in London, for that matter) is false because those are all recently built systems, whereas it would be impossible to have driverless trains on London's deep tube lines in anything like their existing form, for a whole string of reasons, such as that they don't have a passenger walkway beside the tracks between stations, which would be necessary in the event of having to evacuate the passengers. We could clarify matters by saying all that, but that would be WP:OR. -- Alarics (talk) 22:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Absolutelypuremilk: Have you asked Alarics (talk · contribs) directly? Whether you have or have not, don't undo their edit without discussion and agreement, see WP:BRD and WP:EW. I expect their concern was in relation to WP:EDITORIALISING also WP:NPOV. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Right OK that makes sense - thanks for the info, I was just a bit confused to start with as to why it had disappeared! Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 07:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

The biggest "controversy" seems to be the possibility of driverless trains, but this issue was mentioned in this year old video by a seemingly official source that states that even if operation were automatic there would still be an engineer present. B137 (talk) 23:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

It may just be me, but I don't see why the opening paragraph contains this statement 'already in effect on London's DLR and other cities metro lines' when saying that the transport unions have issues with driverless trains. To me, I would say that it's in a way implying that the unions stance on the matter is wrong, because driverless trains exist elsewhere. The fact that driverless trains exist elsewhere, I would argue is irrelevant. I personally would say the statement should be removed. Not entirely sure if this is connected to the above. IAFYM (talk) 05:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

 Done -- Alarics (talk) 21:21, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

rewrite and additions

Had a good go at rewriting this given the contract has been awarded - still got to find some sources for overall project cost for all the lines, the business case ratio, info on any other bidders and using the datasheet from siemens to build an info box for the new train. :) Turini2 (talk) 12:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Added, but still not sure on the infobox layout/reference. Also, I put in a "some have called this 2024 stock but it hasn't been confirmed by TfL" yet sentence, so feel free to edit that if it's still too WP:CRYSTAL Turini2 (talk) 13:53, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Piccadilly is NOT the only line it will operate on

You guys have to remember that the Piccadilly line is not the only line the NTFL will operate on; it will also serve the Bakerloo, Central and Waterloo & City lines. Please add this information into the article. Edgar Searle (talk) 05:57, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

It is contained within the article -

"with options for a total of 250 trains allowing replacement of all existing trains on the deep-level Central, Waterloo & City and Bakerloo lines" in the header at the very top, and "In total, 250 trains could be ordered throughout the lifetime of the Deep Tube Upgrade Programme, comprising 100 trains for the Piccadilly line, 40 trains for the Bakerloo line, 100 trains for the Central line and 10 trains for the Waterloo & City line." in the contract award section. These options have not been confirmed. To state definitively otherwise would be WP:CRYSTAL Turini2 (talk) 11:07, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

The Tube Lines For The Future

Bakerloo Line: The Extension Will Began With Half Height Doors

• Branch #1: Elephant & Castle, Old Kent Road 1 & 2, New Cross Gate, Lewisham, Ladywell, Catford Bridge, Lower Sydenham, New Beckenham, Clock House, Elmers End, Eden Park, West Wickham and Hayes.
• Branch #2: Elephant & Castle, Peckham Rye and New Cross Gate.
• Branch #3: New Beckenham, Beckenham Junction, Shortlands and Bromley South.
  The NTFL Will Be Introduced In 2025. And Run The Service Along With 1972, 1973 & 1992 Stocks.

Piccadilly Line: The Extension Will Began
Refubrished Stations With Full Height Doors From Covent Garden-Knightsbridge
The NTFL Will Replace The 1973 Stock. The 1973 Stock Will Move To Bakerloo Line Along With 1972 & 1992 Stocks.

Central Line: The Extension Will Began Stations With Full Height Doors (Monument, London Bridge, Borough, Elephant & Castle, Kennington, Brixton, Clapham Common, Battersea Park, Victoria And Hyde Park Corner)
The NTFL Will Replace The 1992 Stock. The 1992 Stock Will Move To Bakerloo Line Along With 1972 & 1973 Stocks.

Waterloo & City Line: The Extension Will Began With Half Height Doors

• Branch #1: Waterloo-Hammersmith
• Branch #2: Bank-Kidbrooke
• Branch #3: Waterloo-Streatham Hill
  

The NTFL Will Replace The 1992 Stock. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.204.142.79 (talk) 15:15, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

You need to provide reliable sources, per the policy on verifiability. Otherwise, it is merely guesswork, with the possibility of crystal-ball gazing. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:21, 27 November 2021 (UTC)