|
Post by snowman on Jan 27, 2018 1:06:18 GMT
How many years is a London Bus allowed to be in service in London? Your question is very widely defined so it's hard to answer. Clearly buses of widely varying ages are in regular service including RMs on TfL work. If you are referring to TfL contracted work then putting the RMs on the 15H to one side then the long accepted answer is 14/15 years (effectively 2 contract terms where the QI extension has been activated). Whether that is actually official policy I honestly don't know. The main thing that has driven vehicle replacement policy in London has actually been decisions about air quality / euro emissions standards. It is clear that remains the key aspect that is driving vehicle replacement alongside the usual churn of contract renewal but to new operators who need new vehicles. I agree with Snowman's analysis that vehicle replacement numbers will be pretty flat in the new few years compared to past spend. I actually got some info via FOI to TfL that supports Snowman's view. TfL estimate how much new capital investment is included in the bus contract spend per year. This is the money that would otherwise be spent on new buses by TfL but is, instead, spent by the operators to run the service. The numbers are set out below. These numbers are much reduced on those I obtained for the previous business plan - ranging between £40m and £120m lower depending on the year. These numbers ignore spend on NB4Ls which was completed in 2016/17. Year | Capital element £ms
| 2017/18
| 298
| 2018/19
| 298
| 2019/20
| 298
| 2020/21
| 305
| 2021/22
| 315
| 2022/23
| 328 |
To elaborate further (and trying to answer without too much technical factors) What seems to have happened is that TfL are now treating all remaining buses that were built to euroIII emissions the same regardless of their build year (roughly 2001-2006, exact changeover dates varies by type). There are quarterly bus audit reports and they include a bar chart of numbers from each year. See table 6 on link (there is separate thread debating this). Obviously it tends to be easier to resell a 2005 bus than a 2002 one (which is bordering on scrap age) so for time being some of the 15-17 year old buses are hanging on in there whilst those that might find a new home are going first. The number of buses required, the PVR crept up for 3-4 years as timetables were padded for roadworks etc. This hit a high in March 2017 of 8174, since then cuts have been taking place and had fallen to 7998 by end of 2017 (figures per LOTs). It looks like (my estimate) another 250 will be cut from PVR in 2018 (say 15 routes with PVR down by 3 or more, about 30 routes down by 2 and 50 routes down by 1. Then Shortening routes due to Oxford Street pedestrianisation is about another 50. Currently there are plans for London wide bus ULEZ from April 2019. By which time PVR is likely to be down about 500 from its peak at around 7650-7700. Allowing for spares the bus fleet will be down about 550 from early 2017 peak. From summer 2017 until early 2019 TfLs extra capital spend is upgrades to euroVI standard. Will be about 4800 buses (remainder will be ok from new which is basically buses from about 2015). Once all the buses are done this emissions spend falls to zero. As Snoggle has said there is ongoing capital spend but this includes things like new bus shelters, some experimental hydrogen buses, electric charging infrastructure so isn’t just vehicles. It is looking like only buses built after 2008 will be upgraded, Others will leave (Heritage RMs are special case). Some euroIV and euroV buses will also leave (off lease or contract losses). By now it should be obvious that on ULEZ day (April 2019) the oldest bus will be 11 years old, therefore my prediction is new buses will then fall to a trickle for 2-3 years (mainly for new contract wins). There was a similar lean period from April 2006 to 2008 (following completion of low floor conversion). Around 2022 replacement is likely to return to normal levels (and can be seen in annual projected figures Snoggle has supplied. What is ordered in 4-5 years time may be different bus types to what is ordered today. Going back to the bus audit shows a lot of single deck buses from 2008-2010 which will then need replacement, it’s too early to say but these diesel buses may be replaced by something else like electric (or mild hybrids). Over the longer term, the replacement rate should return to roughly 700 buses a year (say fleet with 8500 buses, average age 6 - 6.5 years old). This is lower than the current rate (bus audit shows some recent years at 1000 buses). Imagine the graph shifted 5 years to the right and you will have idea of what happens in 2020s Hope this helps. content.tfl.gov.uk/fleet-audit-30-september-2017-final.pdf
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 27, 2018 2:03:28 GMT
From summer 2017 until early 2019 TfLs extra capital spend is upgrades to euroVI standard. Will be about 4800 buses (remainder will be ok from new which is basically buses from about 2015). Once all the buses are done this emissions spend falls to zero. As Snoggle has said there is ongoing capital spend but this includes things like new bus shelters, some experimental hydrogen buses, electric charging infrastructure so isn’t just vehicles. Sorry but I have to challenge the above. It is not at all clear where the budget line is that funds the euro6 upgrade to existing buses programme but it is separate from the "capital element" within bus contract costs. Clearly NEW buses for normal contract wins are funded by the "capital element". There is a separate line in TfL's budget for "other capital investment - buses" for things like bus stops, bus stations etc (that has been declared in previous business plans). It may or may not cover things like hydrogen buses - again there is a lack of visibility as to what it covers in any level of detail. "Other Capital Investment" averages about £49m per annum in the latest business plan. It really is not clear to me how TfL has budgeted for the Mayor's initiatives on air quality and whether it is all held centrally in one programme covering a vast range of initiatives such as the ULEZ, the T-Charge, zero emission taxi funding, experimental buses etc or if the funding is distributed to directorates in different lines. I am not so sure the emissions spend falls to zero in the future as TfL and the Mayor have set euro6 as the minimum which leaves scope for TfL / City Hall to set even tougher targets in future that may require further fleet replacement or modification. If you have found something in TfL's paperwork that contradicts my ramblings then happy to be corrected. I haven't read the entire business plan in detail.
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Jan 27, 2018 2:20:11 GMT
Currently there are plans for London wide bus ULEZ from April 2019. As far as I can tell, the plan to extend the ULEZ London-wide for heavy vehicles (including buses) is for 26 October 2020. I can't find any proposal to bring this forward to April 2019. So for buses the ULEZ should initially only apply to the existing congestion-charging zone from April 2019, then the whole of London from October 2020.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jan 27, 2018 8:01:38 GMT
Currently there are plans for London wide bus ULEZ from April 2019. As far as I can tell, the plan to extend the ULEZ London-wide for heavy vehicles (including buses) is for 26 October 2020. I can't find any proposal to bring this forward to April 2019. So for buses the ULEZ should initially only apply to the existing congestion-charging zone from April 2019, then the whole of London from October 2020. I checked and I mixed the dates up, sorry. The consultation is actually open until 28 Feb so dates could change. There are different dates for different vehicle types per link Some low emissions corridors apply from dates between these consultations.tfl.gov.uk/environment/air-quality-consultation-phase-3b/user_uploads/ulez-infographic6.jpgA quick scan of the recently released 2019-2020 tender programme suggests that there won’t be many routes with buses that could not do another 5 years
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jan 27, 2018 9:24:41 GMT
From summer 2017 until early 2019 TfLs extra capital spend is upgrades to euroVI standard. Will be about 4800 buses (remainder will be ok from new which is basically buses from about 2015). Once all the buses are done this emissions spend falls to zero. As Snoggle has said there is ongoing capital spend but this includes things like new bus shelters, some experimental hydrogen buses, electric charging infrastructure so isn’t just vehicles. Sorry but I have to challenge the above. It is not at all clear where the budget line is that funds the euro6 upgrade to existing buses programme but it is separate from the "capital element" within bus contract costs. Clearly NEW buses for normal contract wins are funded by the "capital element". There is a separate line in TfL's budget for "other capital investment - buses" for things like bus stops, bus stations etc (that has been declared in previous business plans). It may or may not cover things like hydrogen buses - again there is a lack of visibility as to what it covers in any level of detail. "Other Capital Investment" averages about £49m per annum in the latest business plan. It really is not clear to me how TfL has budgeted for the Mayor's initiatives on air quality and whether it is all held centrally in one programme covering a vast range of initiatives such as the ULEZ, the T-Charge, zero emission taxi funding, experimental buses etc or if the funding is distributed to directorates in different lines. I am not so sure the emissions spend falls to zero in the future as TfL and the Mayor have set euro6 as the minimum which leaves scope for TfL / City Hall to set even tougher targets in future that may require further fleet replacement or modification. If you have found something in TfL's paperwork that contradicts my ramblings then happy to be corrected. I haven't read the entire business plan in detail. I think I was having woolly brain syndrome last night (bad cold, no alcohol). You are correct there is the vague other capital investment (although finance papers sometimes give clues). And TfL can be particularly vague on what falls into each category in the budget. It would not surprise me if some items move between categories year to year to smooth the spending profile to the previous spending projection (so less questions asked). From an accounting point of view, budgeted capital spending seems to include contract operating costs (as opposed to asset purchases), so is more capital commitments, not capital investment (subtle difference). I am used to the normal FRS accounting terms where capital spending is long term purchases or improvements, not routine operating spending under multi-year contracts which is the way TfL seem to use it. I think we both know that smoke and mirrors is used (it’s not as if the money ever runs out mid March, and spending stops to new financial year). Clearly there is some adjustments going on short term. In practice I suspect other items such as length of peak hour service, or what time in evening the service thins are being adjusted to realign spending which adds up over time.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 27, 2018 12:56:25 GMT
I think I was having woolly brain syndrome last night (bad cold, no alcohol). You are correct there is the vague other capital investment (although finance papers sometimes give clues). And TfL can be particularly vague on what falls into each category in the budget. It would not surprise me if some items move between categories year to year to smooth the spending profile to the previous spending projection (so less questions asked). From an accounting point of view, budgeted capital spending seems to include contract operating costs (as opposed to asset purchases), so is more capital commitments, not capital investment (subtle difference). I am used to the normal FRS accounting terms where capital spending is long term purchases or improvements, not routine operating spending under multi-year contracts which is the way TfL seem to use it. I think we both know that smoke and mirrors is used (it’s not as if the money ever runs out mid March, and spending stops to new financial year). Clearly there is some adjustments going on short term. In practice I suspect other items such as length of peak hour service, or what time in evening the service thins are being adjusted to realign spending which adds up over time. Having had many, many years of involvement with TfL Finance I know how it used to be done. I accept things may have changed for all sorts of reasons but contract operating costs were never capitalised. Revenue budgets (for operating expenditure and that includes bus contracts) and capital budgets were two different things. I've run both sets of budgets in my time. I also ran part of a very large PPP service contract (non project stuff). I completely take your point that money doesn't run out at year end but we still had to do year end closing accounts with accruals for any issues not settled (e.g. service incident attribution settlements or where value of work done was achieved but cash had not gone out of the door). Clearly TfL do "over programme" on capital programmes and there can be legitimate reasons for spend not matching expected budget profiles - we've both read such things in the TfL Finance reports.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Feb 4, 2018 16:20:49 GMT
This question is to the garage staff or the staff that work for a bus company. Are you allowed to release certain information about the companyg to the public? Is your information checked by the bus company before you release information to a public forum?
|
|
|
Post by VPL630 on Feb 4, 2018 17:08:47 GMT
This question is to the garage staff or the staff that work for a bus company. Are you allowed to release certain information about the companyg to the public? Is your information checked by the bus company before you release information to a public forum? Depends on the social media policy of the company but pretty much the answer is no, unless you ask the company for written permission and/or the information is publicly or easily available
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 4, 2018 17:28:34 GMT
This question is to the garage staff or the staff that work for a bus company. Are you allowed to release certain information about the companyg to the public? Is your information checked by the bus company before you release information to a public forum? Not quite the answer to your question but I know from experience, and from the much earlier days of "social media", that saying the "wrong thing" (as judged by others) can seriously endanger your employment status. I survived but it was not a pleasant experience and I didn't exactly say anything very important or revealing. I expect these days it would be *vastly* worse given how stuff on social media can escalate out of control and is picked up by mainstream media very quickly. In a purely commercial business like a bus company I'd expect the release of company info would put you on the path to dismissal or severe sanction very quickly. It is worth bearing in mind that many companies are stock exchange listed and even something innocuous can have an impact on share prices. You are then into the realms of criminal prosecution so best avoided. It is worth noting that if speculative leaks about tender awards were to end up affecting company share prices then whoever was found to be responsible for the "leak" might be in serious trouble.
|
|
|
Post by VPL630 on Feb 4, 2018 19:15:31 GMT
This question is to the garage staff or the staff that work for a bus company. Are you allowed to release certain information about the companyg to the public? Is your information checked by the bus company before you release information to a public forum? Not quite the answer to your question but I know from experience, and from the much earlier days of "social media", that saying the "wrong thing" (as judged by others) can seriously endanger your employment status. I survived but it was not a pleasant experience and I didn't exactly say anything very important or revealing. I expect these days it would be *vastly* worse given how stuff on social media can escalate out of control and is picked up by mainstream media very quickly. In a purely commercial business like a bus company I'd expect the release of company info would put you on the path to dismissal or severe sanction very quickly. It is worth bearing in mind that many companies are stock exchange listed and even something innocuous can have an impact on share prices. You are then into the realms of criminal prosecution so best avoided. It is worth noting that if speculative leaks about tender awards were to end up affecting company share prices then whoever was found to be responsible for the "leak" might be in serious trouble. Remember a while back when fake tender results were posted, this got round to driver level at many companies and was very annoying for any staff that would have been affected by it if it had been true
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 4, 2018 21:45:14 GMT
Remember a while back when fake tender results were posted, this got round to driver level at many companies and was very annoying for any staff that would have been affected by it if it had been true Yes, there is that aspect too. I tend to take it "as read" given the multiple warnings we have about it on here. I'd rather we didn't have tender speculation at all but I understand why people get "excited" (or overwraught) about it.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Mar 3, 2018 16:55:34 GMT
A question relating to travelcards. I buy monthly travelcards and being on a student loan I tend to do everything to keep my costs down, this has led me to notice a weird quirk in the pricing of them. I initially brought my travelcards from my local Barking Station and this would cost around £135 a month however one day I happened to renew in Ilford and the price was £131. Since then I have been renewing at Ilford to save a few pounds, however today I went to renew it at Stratford and I ended up paying £129. Does anyone know what's going on with the pricing? Seems very strange the exact same ticket costs different prices at different stations.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 4, 2018 0:29:52 GMT
A question relating to travelcards. I buy monthly travelcards and being on a student loan I tend to do everything to keep my costs down, this has led me to notice a weird quirk in the pricing of them. I initially brought my travelcards from my local Barking Station and this would cost around £135 a month however one day I happened to renew in Ilford and the price was £131. Since then I have been renewing at Ilford to save a few pounds, however today I went to renew it at Stratford and I ended up paying £129. Does anyone know what's going on with the pricing? Seems very strange the exact same ticket costs different prices at different stations. To be honest I cannot see how a monthly ticket would vary in price. A monthly is 3.84 times the 7 day rate. It should not ever vary upon renewal. The only thing I can think of is whether you have had some sort of price reduction due to performance issues. The only other possibility is if you specified the end date each time and you were actually buying a 30 or 29 or 28 day period ticket - that would explain a small variation in pricing. Otherwise I'd suggest reporting the inconsistency because it really should not be happening and it suggests that someone's ticket machines are incorrectly programmed. This link shows the 2018 rates. I assume you are buying a Monthly Student Z14 Travelcard which should be priced at £131.40.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Mar 4, 2018 11:07:12 GMT
A question relating to travelcards. I buy monthly travelcards and being on a student loan I tend to do everything to keep my costs down, this has led me to notice a weird quirk in the pricing of them. I initially brought my travelcards from my local Barking Station and this would cost around £135 a month however one day I happened to renew in Ilford and the price was £131. Since then I have been renewing at Ilford to save a few pounds, however today I went to renew it at Stratford and I ended up paying £129. Does anyone know what's going on with the pricing? Seems very strange the exact same ticket costs different prices at different stations. To be honest I cannot see how a monthly ticket would vary in price. A monthly is 3.84 times the 7 day rate. It should not ever vary upon renewal. The only thing I can think of is whether you have had some sort of price reduction due to performance issues. The only other possibility is if you specified the end date each time and you were actually buying a 30 or 29 or 28 day period ticket - that would explain a small variation in pricing. Otherwise I'd suggest reporting the inconsistency because it really should not be happening and it suggests that someone's ticket machines are incorrectly programmed. This link shows the 2018 rates. I assume you are buying a Monthly Student Z14 Travelcard which should be priced at £131.40. I had initially thought that the variation in days of the month may be to blame, but then my 31 day ticket turned out to be cheaper than the 28 day ticket that I had previously brought so I put that theory to bed. May I also ask what you mean by performance issues? Quite often I do get delayed home due to various issues, are these remembered in my history then a discount applied when I next renew?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 4, 2018 12:41:54 GMT
To be honest I cannot see how a monthly ticket would vary in price. A monthly is 3.84 times the 7 day rate. It should not ever vary upon renewal. The only thing I can think of is whether you have had some sort of price reduction due to performance issues. The only other possibility is if you specified the end date each time and you were actually buying a 30 or 29 or 28 day period ticket - that would explain a small variation in pricing. Otherwise I'd suggest reporting the inconsistency because it really should not be happening and it suggests that someone's ticket machines are incorrectly programmed. This link shows the 2018 rates. I assume you are buying a Monthly Student Z14 Travelcard which should be priced at £131.40. I had initially thought that the variation in days of the month may be to blame, but then my 31 day ticket turned out to be cheaper than the 28 day ticket that I had previously brought so I put that theory to bed. May I also ask what you mean by performance issues? Quite often I do get delayed home due to various issues, are these remembered in my history then a discount applied when I next renew? I believe a number of franchises now incorporate a mechanism whereby if the service levels are persistently lower than a set level then "refunds" or "extra days" are set on Travelcard renewals. This is in addition to "delay / repay" provisions. However don't quote me on this as I am not up to date on these provisions. It is not so much that individual delays are remembered but more that specific days in a period would be recorded as "below standard". I believe C2C have automatic delay / repay in place but only for those who have a C2C smartcard, not Oyster. The ticketing experts on "Railforums.co.uk" would be able to give chapter and verse but you'd need to register to be able to post on that forum. They have a specific fares and ticketing section on their forum.
|
|