|
Post by SILENCED on May 19, 2019 11:30:33 GMT
Now that it is official that cuts go ahead Saturday 15 June (with further batch in October), trying to work out what effects on fleets will be 4 changing from Waterloo, to Blackfriars might need save Metroline 2 buses 134 shortening probably saves Metroline a bus 35 needs more buses as frequency increased by a third from GoAhead 40 dropping Aldgate, but gaining section to Clerkenwell appears to need extra bus 76 cut back saves a few buses for GoAhead 100 extension might not require extra bus 171 cutback saves few buses 172 cutback saves few buses 45 cut Elephant- Kings Cross means Abellio need few less buses 53 being cut back and frequency dropped must save Stagecoach a bus or 2 205 running more directly and frequency cut should release bus or 2 for Stagecoach 59 shortening saves Arriva a bus 67 being cut south of Dalston saves Arriva a few buses 149 frequency cuts save some buses for Arriva 242 reroute and frequency cuts saves yet more buses for Arriva 388 cut back saves CT Plus few buses (and should allow Stagecoach loans to go back) The 388 gets lengthen again in October when it part replaces 48 RV1 withdrawn, so whole fleet of hydrogen buses spare at Tower Transit So for this phase appears Arriva, Abellio and Tower Transit are the main losers Arriva won’t be scrapping the HVs , so small number of older deckers look vulnerable Abellio might send some of it’s older diesel deckers off lease Looks like Metroline, GoAhead and RATP are not really taking any cuts on this phase Probably be few more EHs on 35, but that route seems to operate with mixture of types anyway. Thank you for your detailed count. Within GA a few EHs from routes 171 & 172 seem likely to switch to route 35. It may even balance out allocations better to move route 171 to Q and route 185 to NX. Within Arriva I doubt many if any older double-deckers will be withdrawn at this stage. I reckon they will be held back for route 34. Come October, if all the spare HVs - including any from a current route gaining route 48 LTs not needed for route 55 - total more than are needed for route 34, then yes, some will start the hybridisation of route 102. Would be very poor fleet management by Arriva if they did as you said ... why not put them on the 102 straight away ... they know how many vehicles they will have and need(ed) to order and delivery timescales should not be a problem ... removing vehicles from fleet and associated maintenance as early as practicable makes sense. Imagine getting rid of the pre 2000 DLA and Cadet trainers will be a high priority.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2019 11:39:36 GMT
Why would the 185 move to New Cross when it passes directly outside Camberwell and goes nowhere near New Cross? Route 185 goes as near NX as route 178 does. Depending on revised pvr's, I notice that NX routes 171 & 172 are losing buses while Q route 35 is gaining buses. Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on May 19, 2019 11:41:10 GMT
Route 185 goes as near NX as route 178 does. Depending on revised pvr's, I notice that NX routes 171 & 172 are losing buses while Q route 35 is gaining buses. Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Not with remote sign on!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 19, 2019 12:32:06 GMT
Why would the 185 move to New Cross when it passes directly outside Camberwell and goes nowhere near New Cross? Route 185 goes as near NX as route 178 does. Depending on revised pvr's, I notice that NX routes 171 & 172 are losing buses while Q route 35 is gaining buses. But the 178 goes nowhere near Q unlike the 185 does.
|
|
|
Post by dennistas on May 19, 2019 14:03:18 GMT
Where can I find a detailed list of all the cuts and the routes in their new form?
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 19, 2019 14:08:14 GMT
Where can I find a detailed list of all the cuts and the routes in their new form? Thanks At the current time, not aware of any detailed list on the web, TfL have a rather basic version on their bus changes page. Some more detailed versions might become available soon. If you subscribe to LOTs there is a 2 page list in the TLB that came out this week, (for 15th June within forthcoming changes section), covering 27 routes + 2 night routes, but it is in printed form only
|
|
|
Post by beaver14uk on May 19, 2019 15:07:53 GMT
How does it work with the 1s changing at Waterloo then with remote sign ons quote author="@mhv85" source="/post/501149/thread" timestamp="1558265976"] Route 185 goes as near NX as route 178 does. Depending on revised pvr's, I notice that NX routes 171 & 172 are losing buses while Q route 35 is gaining buses. Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171.[/quote]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2019 15:51:56 GMT
How does it work with the 1s changing at Waterloo then with remote sign ons quote author="@mhv85" source="/post/501149/thread" timestamp="1558265976"] Route 185 goes as near NX as route 178 does. Depending on revised pvr's, I notice that NX routes 171 & 172 are losing buses while Q route 35 is gaining buses. Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171. [/quote] But the 1 doesn't pass a garage on its line of route (apart from Waterloo of course), like the 185 does. Fair enough about the remote sign on, I overlooked that when writing my original post, but I still think it's pointless to move it to New Cross when it goes straight past Camberwell. Also makes it more difficult to sub buses, and as I pointed out would also have a very inefficient schedule.
|
|
|
Post by beaver14uk on May 19, 2019 16:32:01 GMT
My point is MG is hardly ideal for the 1s when you have to travel to Waterloo quote author="@mhv85" source="/post/501177/thread" timestamp="1558281116"] How does it work with the 1s changing at Waterloo then with remote sign ons quote author="@mhv85" source="/post/501149/thread" timestamp="1558265976"]Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171. [/quote] But the 1 doesn't pass a garage on its line of route (apart from Waterloo of course), like the 185 does. Fair enough about the remote sign on, I overlooked that when writing my original post, but I still think it's pointless to move it to New Cross when it goes straight past Camberwell. Also makes it more difficult to sub buses, and as I pointed out would also have a very inefficient schedule.[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by LVF_Admin on May 19, 2019 16:49:03 GMT
My point is MG is hardly ideal for the 1s when you have to travel to Waterloo quote author="@mhv85 " source="/post/501177/thread" timestamp="1558281116"] How does it work with the 1s changing at Waterloo then with remote sign ons quote author="@mhv85 " source="/post/501149/thread" timestamp="1558265976"]Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171. North Greenwich to Waterloo doesnt take long on the Jubilee Line
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 19, 2019 16:58:56 GMT
How does it work with the 1s changing at Waterloo then with remote sign ons quote author="@mhv85 " source="/post/501149/thread" timestamp="1558265976"] Route 185 goes as near NX as route 178 does. Depending on revised pvr's, I notice that NX routes 171 & 172 are losing buses while Q route 35 is gaining buses. Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171. Also. unscheduled turns would mostly have to be at the Victoria end, a section of route that has already lost the 436 in recent times. Back when WL ran the route turns were evenly balanced at Catford, Rushey Green and Vauxhall, depending on time of day. The 185 has changed little since tram days, other than the cutback from Greenwich to Lewisham. [/quote]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2019 17:12:47 GMT
My point is MG is hardly ideal for the 1s when you have to travel to Waterloo quote author="@mhv85" source="/post/501177/thread" timestamp="1558281116"] How does it work with the 1s changing at Waterloo then with remote sign ons quote author="@mhv85" source="/post/501149/thread" timestamp="1558265976"]Would be stupid to move the 185 to NX as it would cost the company money. Remember they pay drivers for the travelling time to the changeover point. At Camberwell, the amount of money spent on travel time is low as it changes over outside the garage. At New Cross it would cost the company huge amounts of money. Plus changeovers at Lewisham wouldn't work on the 185, as you are limited to doing full rounders. On a middle duty, you wouldn't fit 2 rounders on the 185 into 5.5 hours (the legal driving time limit). Therefore all middle turns would have to be 1 then 1, making the duties very short, costing the company money. This is the same reason why the 36 duties are split with the 171. But the 1 doesn't pass a garage on its line of route (apart from Waterloo of course), like the 185 does. Fair enough about the remote sign on, I overlooked that when writing my original post, but I still think it's pointless to move it to New Cross when it goes straight past Camberwell. Also makes it more difficult to sub buses, and as I pointed out would also have a very inefficient schedule.[/quote] [/quote] I agree. Can't understand why it is at MG.
|
|
|
Post by ibus246 on May 19, 2019 17:34:44 GMT
Where can I find a detailed list of all the cuts and the routes in their new form? Thanks Yes same here. I’m totally confused. The TfL perm changes site is useless. A PDF comprehensive document bullet pointed with maps would be suffice and indeed the most effective solution. Lucky I don’t have to use these routes. The public are in for some nasty surprises. I assume stuff will be scrolling on iBus screens soon
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 19, 2019 17:51:47 GMT
Where can I find a detailed list of all the cuts and the routes in their new form? Thanks Yes same here. I’m totally confused. The TfL perm changes site is useless. A PDF comprehensive document bullet pointed with maps would be suffice and indeed the most effective solution. Lucky I don’t have to use these routes. The public are in for some nasty surprises. I assume stuff will be scrolling on iBus screens soon The Information Age, supposedly, where knowledge and insight are not only frowned upon but derided.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on May 19, 2019 18:16:47 GMT
Yes same here. I’m totally confused. The TfL perm changes site is useless. A PDF comprehensive document bullet pointed with maps would be suffice and indeed the most effective solution. Lucky I don’t have to use these routes. The public are in for some nasty surprises. I assume stuff will be scrolling on iBus screens soon The Information Age, supposedly, where knowledge and insight are not only frowned upon but derided. A casualty of a news development beginning with B which means experts are supposed to be rejected nowadays.
|
|