|
Post by busaholic on Mar 18, 2019 20:48:34 GMT
2 things about route numbering... 1) How long do TfL wait before reusing numbers (eg 305, 82...) 2) Why are there so many 3XX new numbers appearing lately (301, 311...) Not sure about 1), but using the redundant number in a different location. Check Ian Armstrongs bus page, I'll give the 32,87, 163 as examples. Just off the top of my head, I can think of four entirely different iterations of the 178 in my lifetime (and, contrary to what some people MAY think, I wasn't around in Lord Ashfield's days.)
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Mar 19, 2019 7:15:52 GMT
2 things about route numbering... 1) How long do TfL wait before reusing numbers (eg 305, 82...) 2) Why are there so many 3XX new numbers appearing lately (301, 311...) Not sure but the 87 was used quickly again, Route 278 has been recycled a few times too since the 90s. 87 was certainly reused quickly - the previous 87 was withdrawn on 25 March 2006 and the "new" 87 introduced on 3 June 2006.
The quickest reuse that I can think of was the 400, which ceased to exist in the Croydon area on 28 August 1998 but reappeared the very next day in the Feltham area (as a renumbering of the 602 and H27).
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 19, 2019 7:20:01 GMT
Not sure but the 87 was used quickly again, Route 278 has been recycled a few times too since the 90s. 87 was certainly reused quickly - the previous 87 was withdrawn on 25 March 2006 and the "new" 87 introduced on 3 June 2006.
The quickest reuse that I can think of was the 400, which ceased to exist in the Croydon area on 28 August 1998 but reappeared the very next day in the Feltham area (as a renumbering of the 602 and H27).
There were suggestions that the East London 87 was only withdrawn so that the number could be reused on the 77A, how true that is we will probably never know.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Mar 21, 2019 16:26:00 GMT
Is the original body of the Enviro 200 / 400 still available? Is the Wright Eclipse Gemini 3 bodied Volvo B5LH/B5TL sill available with the original front front?
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Mar 21, 2019 16:46:33 GMT
Is the original body of the Enviro 200 / 400 still available? Is the Wright Eclipse Gemini 3 bodied Volvo B5LH/B5TL sill available with the original front front? I think the E200 yes,but higher cost? Some new ones in Watford I think
|
|
|
Post by Pilot on Mar 21, 2019 16:56:53 GMT
Probably stupid question, but when or how often does ADL do a facelift of generic ADL 200/400 buses?
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Mar 21, 2019 17:45:56 GMT
Probably stupid question, but when or how often does ADL do a facelift of generic ADL 200/400 buses? Changes its models about every 8-9 years Example ALX400 was about 1998-2006, Enviro400 2006-2015, E400MMC 2015-
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Mar 21, 2019 18:13:18 GMT
87 was certainly reused quickly - the previous 87 was withdrawn on 25 March 2006 and the "new" 87 introduced on 3 June 2006.
The quickest reuse that I can think of was the 400, which ceased to exist in the Croydon area on 28 August 1998 but reappeared the very next day in the Feltham area (as a renumbering of the 602 and H27).
There were suggestions that the East London 87 was only withdrawn so that the number could be reused on the 77A, how true that is we will probably never know. The 77A was originally going to have a different number[1] prior to being replaced with 87. Presumably then the change would have likely happened regardless of whether the 87 number was available or not. [1] - 77A to 77 (77 to 272) if I remember correctly off the top of my head
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2019 19:45:31 GMT
I was on a 139 today heading from Oxford Circus up to West Hampstead. Due to service disruptions between Oxford Street and Picadilly Circus, the driver was flooring it down Rossmore Road and Lisson Grove to try and make up time, so much so that he (purposely) missed about 3 stops where people intended to board. I was fine with this until we got to 'St John's Wood Road/Lord's Cricket Ground'. The driver was hastily pulling away from the stop when a suddenly a young man walked straight out into the road and got hit. Thankfully he wasn't injured, got up fairly quickly and recognised that it was his fault for being too preoccupied with whatever was on his phone. It's extremely lucky for the driver that neither party decided to report the incident, as had it been more serious I'm sure the CCTV footage would come under scrutiny. Speeding past waving passengers in 20mph school zones, driving erratically down busy roads, then hitting a person to top it all off would I'm sure bring very serious sanctions.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 21, 2019 20:14:45 GMT
I was on a 139 today heading from Oxford Circus up to West Hampstead. Due to service disruptions between Oxford Street and Picadilly Circus, the driver was flooring it down Rossmore Road and Lisson Grove to try and make up time, so much so that he (purposely) missed about 3 stops where people intended to board. I was fine with this until we got to 'St John's Wood Road/Lord's Cricket Ground'. The driver was hastily pulling away from the stop when a suddenly a young man walked straight out into the road and got hit. Thankfully he wasn't injured, got up fairly quickly and recognised that it was his fault for being too preoccupied with whatever was on his phone. It's extremely lucky for the driver that neither party decided to report the incident, as had it been more serious I'm sure the CCTV footage would come under scrutiny. Speeding past waving passengers in 20mph school zones, driving erratically down busy roads, then hitting a person to top it all off would I'm sure bring very serious sanctions. I just cannot understand why drivers behave like that. If the bus was delayed in the West End it's not the drivers fault, by all means take reasonable steps to claw back some of the lost time but that shouldn't extend to missing stops and exceeding speed limits. Did the driver speak to the person who was hit by the bus? If he didn't he's left himself open to all sorts of allegations. What if the victim suddenly realises he could get a claim out of it and goes to the police? If it was that bad I would report it through the link below. tfl.gov.uk/help-and-contact/contact-us-about-buses
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Mar 21, 2019 20:15:26 GMT
There were suggestions that the East London 87 was only withdrawn so that the number could be reused on the 77A, how true that is we will probably never know. The 77A was originally going to have a different number[1] prior to being replaced with 87. Presumably then the change would have likely happened regardless of whether the 87 number was available or not. [1] - 77A to 77 (77 to 272) if I remember correctly off the top of my head Yes, IIRC it was part of the Jubilee Line Extension proposals that the 77 would be renumbered 272 (nothing to do with the Jubilee in itself, but the opportunity was being taken to restructure some of the south London routes). Presumably the intention was to renumber 77A to 77 once enough time had passed. I always thought that would have been problematic (and pointless); no matter how much time had elapsed, some people would still remember the old 77 route so there would have been confusion on the common section.
For the 2006 contract the 77A/N77 was tendered and awarded as 437/N437 as it was not known at the time that the 87 number would be available.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Mar 21, 2019 20:27:57 GMT
I was on a 139 today heading from Oxford Circus up to West Hampstead. Due to service disruptions between Oxford Street and Picadilly Circus, the driver was flooring it down Rossmore Road and Lisson Grove to try and make up time, so much so that he (purposely) missed about 3 stops where people intended to board. I was fine with this until we got to 'St John's Wood Road/Lord's Cricket Ground'. The driver was hastily pulling away from the stop when a suddenly a young man walked straight out into the road and got hit. Thankfully he wasn't injured, got up fairly quickly and recognised that it was his fault for being too preoccupied with whatever was on his phone. It's extremely lucky for the driver that neither party decided to report the incident, as had it been more serious I'm sure the CCTV footage would come under scrutiny. Speeding past waving passengers in 20mph school zones, driving erratically down busy roads, then hitting a person to top it all off would I'm sure bring very serious sanctions. Did you speak to the driver about his driving, or report him?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2019 21:18:45 GMT
I was on a 139 today heading from Oxford Circus up to West Hampstead. Due to service disruptions between Oxford Street and Picadilly Circus, the driver was flooring it down Rossmore Road and Lisson Grove to try and make up time, so much so that he (purposely) missed about 3 stops where people intended to board. I was fine with this until we got to 'St John's Wood Road/Lord's Cricket Ground'. The driver was hastily pulling away from the stop when a suddenly a young man walked straight out into the road and got hit. Thankfully he wasn't injured, got up fairly quickly and recognised that it was his fault for being too preoccupied with whatever was on his phone. It's extremely lucky for the driver that neither party decided to report the incident, as had it been more serious I'm sure the CCTV footage would come under scrutiny. Speeding past waving passengers in 20mph school zones, driving erratically down busy roads, then hitting a person to top it all off would I'm sure bring very serious sanctions. I just cannot understand why drivers behave like that. If the bus was delayed in the West End it's not the drivers fault, by all means take reasonable steps to claw back some of the lost time but that shouldn't extend to missing stops and exceeding speed limits. Did the driver speak to the person who was hit by the bus? If he didn't he's left himself open to all sorts of allegations. What if the victim suddenly realises he could get a claim out of it and goes to the police? If it was that bad I would report it through the link below. tfl.gov.uk/help-and-contact/contact-us-about-busesThe driver did stop and open the doors to ask if the gentleman was okay, and thankfully he was. He was being very apologetic, mostly out of shock I assume, as he realised he could have been seriously injured. He acknowledged that it wasn't the drivers fault, as he stepped out directly in front of the bus as it pulled away from the stop, so he wasn't angry or annoyed with the driver's behaviour. Yes the accident could have been avoided if the driver wasn't in such a rush, though the same could be said if the gentleman had looked when he crossed the road. Despite moral obligations, I choosing not to report this incident. I wasn't directly affected by this, and not having ever driven a bus or been in an accident of this type, I don't believe that I'm in a position to take such action; It could cost someone their career.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Mar 21, 2019 21:33:18 GMT
I was on a 139 today heading from Oxford Circus up to West Hampstead. Due to service disruptions between Oxford Street and Picadilly Circus, the driver was flooring it down Rossmore Road and Lisson Grove to try and make up time, so much so that he (purposely) missed about 3 stops where people intended to board. I was fine with this until we got to 'St John's Wood Road/Lord's Cricket Ground'. The driver was hastily pulling away from the stop when a suddenly a young man walked straight out into the road and got hit. Thankfully he wasn't injured, got up fairly quickly and recognised that it was his fault for being too preoccupied with whatever was on his phone. It's extremely lucky for the driver that neither party decided to report the incident, as had it been more serious I'm sure the CCTV footage would come under scrutiny. Speeding past waving passengers in 20mph school zones, driving erratically down busy roads, then hitting a person to top it all off would I'm sure bring very serious sanctions. I'd have thought the driver would be required to report hitting somebody. What if the person hit was to collapse two hours later and be carted off to hospital, where his unreported injuries were found to be germane to his condition? At the very least, I'd have reported the driver, and told him I was doing so to give him an opportunity to 'fess up, and I say that as someone's who's extremely reluctant to take this form of action (two or three times in last fifty years.)
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Mar 21, 2019 21:35:10 GMT
The 77A was originally going to have a different number[1] prior to being replaced with 87. Presumably then the change would have likely happened regardless of whether the 87 number was available or not. [1] - 77A to 77 (77 to 272) if I remember correctly off the top of my head Yes, IIRC it was part of the Jubilee Line Extension proposals that the 77 would be renumbered 272 (nothing to do with the Jubilee in itself, but the opportunity was being taken to restructure some of the south London routes). Presumably the intention was to renumber 77A to 77 once enough time had passed. I always thought that would have been problematic (and pointless); no matter how much time had elapsed, some people would still remember the old 77 route so there would have been confusion on the common section.
For the 2006 contract the 77A/N77 was tendered and awarded as 437/N437 as it was not known at the time that the 87 number would be available. I never realised til now the 77 and 77A changes were going to have a time period in between (assumed it was all at once). Nevertheless like you said the confusion would've still existed, especially where residents are used to the 77 to both St. Thomas's and St George's hospitals.
|
|