|
Post by rif153 on Jul 9, 2019 17:01:02 GMT
It looks as if Metroline aren't too fussed which VMHs end up at G for the 607. Its entirely possible that VMH2561 could go to PA for the 90 and is just at G for the mean time but I was expecting only 19-plate buses to go to G for the 607
|
|
|
Post by E279 on Jul 9, 2019 17:03:03 GMT
It looks as if Metroline aren't too fussed which VMHs end up at G for the 607. Its entirely possible that VMH2561 could go to PA for the 90 and is just at G for the mean time but I was expecting only 19-plate buses to go to G for the 607 Doesn’t surprise me, Metroline never seen it keep batches together. 🙄
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jul 9, 2019 17:06:32 GMT
It looks as if Metroline aren't too fussed which VMHs end up at G for the 607. Its entirely possible that VMH2561 could go to PA for the 90 and is just at G for the mean time but I was expecting only 19-plate buses to go to G for the 607 Maybe they just send whatever is free or they maybe planning to have both 68 and 19 plates transferred?
|
|
|
Post by E279 on Jul 9, 2019 17:12:06 GMT
It looks as if Metroline aren't too fussed which VMHs end up at G for the 607. Its entirely possible that VMH2561 could go to PA for the 90 and is just at G for the mean time but I was expecting only 19-plate buses to go to G for the 607 Maybe they just send whatever is free or they maybe planning to have both 68 and 19 plates transferred? Well there are 2 (1) routes coming up for tender at G, those 09 Reg first buses won’t surive another contract. (1) Route 282/482.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 9, 2019 17:18:05 GMT
It looks as if Metroline aren't too fussed which VMHs end up at G for the 607. Its entirely possible that VMH2561 could go to PA for the 90 and is just at G for the mean time but I was expecting only 19-plate buses to go to G for the 607 Maybe they just send whatever is free or they maybe planning to have both 68 and 19 plates transferred? Either of those are plausible, when both the 68 and 19 plates are identical it really doesn't matter which transfers but it would seem as if sending VMHs to G to make up the 607's allocation is the priority so whatever VMHs are available will be transferred, and once the requisite number of VMHs haved moved to G from HT then HT can start worrying about sending other VMHs elsewhere
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jul 9, 2019 17:24:35 GMT
Maybe they just send whatever is free or they maybe planning to have both 68 and 19 plates transferred? Either of those are plausible, when both the 68 and 19 plates are identical it really doesn't matter which transfers but it would seem as if sending VMHs to G to make up the 607's allocation is the priority so whatever VMHs are available will be transferred, and once the requisite number of VMHs haved moved to G from HT then HT can start worrying about sending other VMHs elsewhere And PB VMHs will/Could go to UX?
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 9, 2019 17:25:20 GMT
Either of those are plausible, when both the 68 and 19 plates are identical it really doesn't matter which transfers but it would seem as if sending VMHs to G to make up the 607's allocation is the priority so whatever VMHs are available will be transferred, and once the requisite number of VMHs haved moved to G from HT then HT can start worrying about sending other VMHs elsewhere And PB VMHs will/Could go to UX? Entirely possible seeing as the TEs at UX won't last for much longer
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Jul 9, 2019 17:33:45 GMT
It looks as if Metroline aren't too fussed which VMHs end up at G for the 607. Its entirely possible that VMH2561 could go to PA for the 90 and is just at G for the mean time but I was expecting only 19-plate buses to go to G for the 607 Remember that there only 20 19 reg VMH's built for the 607 as the route was meant to be withdrawn from White City which the PVR would have gone down by 1 bus and it only has 1 spare bus ordered on the basis it would share a spare VWH from the 114 or 222 had it stayed at UX. So at least two 68 reg VMH's have to transfer to G in order to complete the 607's allocation.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 9, 2019 18:02:12 GMT
Maybe they just send whatever is free or they maybe planning to have both 68 and 19 plates transferred? Either of those are plausible, when both the 68 and 19 plates are identical it really doesn't matter which transfers but it would seem as if sending VMHs to G to make up the 607's allocation is the priority so whatever VMHs are available will be transferred, and once the requisite number of VMHs haved moved to G from HT then HT can start worrying about sending other VMHs elsewhere Variation upon that theme, VMHs 2569-70, and 2582 are all in use on KC routes today. It could be that HT have loaned them to KC or perhaps these VMHs have been deemed superfluous at HT with the arrival of the BDEs
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Jul 9, 2019 20:49:06 GMT
ADH40548 V>TV It may just have been logged in to ibus as a 662 It was actually on the route, and now has TV codes too so looks like its there to stay flic.kr/p/2gv7Hzz (not my pic)
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 9, 2019 21:07:22 GMT
ADH40548 V>TV It may just have been logged in to ibus as a 662 It was actually on the route, and now has TV codes too so looks like its there to stay flic.kr/p/2gv7Hzz (not my pic) Ah, thanks for the confirmation. Its pretty cool that TV now have ADHs, VHs, and SPs. Hopefully this makes the 71/85 more interesting although I wonder whether its only a temporary transfer and the bus has just transferred there as short term cover for a VH (45183 hasn't seen use since Friday). TV have had to put SP4009 on the 85 with SP40104 on the 85 today which is hardly ideal when the 85 goes through the Putney High Street LEBZ, I supsect ADH40548 is only at TV in the short term to ease the shortage of hybrids although its a little strange RATP introduced a new type to TV
|
|
|
Post by george on Jul 9, 2019 21:27:48 GMT
It was actually on the route, and now has TV codes too so looks like its there to stay flic.kr/p/2gv7Hzz (not my pic) Ah, thanks for the confirmation. Its pretty cool that TV now have ADHs, VHs, and SPs. Hopefully this makes the 71/85 more interesting although I wonder whether its only a temporary transfer and the bus has just transferred there as short term cover for a VH (45183 hasn't seen use since Friday). TV have had to put SP4009 on the 85 with SP40104 on the 85 today which is hardly ideal when the 85 goes through the Putney High Street LEBZ, I supsect ADH40548 is only at TV in the short term to ease the shortage of hybrids although its a little strange RATP introduced a new type to TV I think it will be a temporary transfer but it is strange that they changed the fleetcode on the first day if it is only temporary when you still get buses with the wrong fleetcodes years after they transfered.
|
|
|
Post by paulo on Jul 9, 2019 22:24:47 GMT
ADH40548 V>TV It may just have been logged in to ibus as a 662 It was actually on the route, and now has TV codes too so looks like its there to stay flic.kr/p/2gv7Hzz (not my pic) Could be coving for the VH which is VOR at present. Spare hybrids at TV are at a premium hence once of the 65’s got swapped with an SP at Fulwell a year or so ago. Strange that it’s been TV coded though if it’s a temporary transfer. It may just stay on the 662 to avoid mass driver type training
|
|
|
Post by Max B on Jul 10, 2019 6:07:44 GMT
DW480 WN > DT.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 10, 2019 8:57:46 GMT
It was actually on the route, and now has TV codes too so looks like its there to stay flic.kr/p/2gv7Hzz (not my pic) Could be coving for the VH which is VOR at present. Spare hybrids at TV are at a premium hence once of the 65’s got swapped with an SP at Fulwell a year or so ago. Strange that it’s been TV coded though if it’s a temporary transfer. It may just stay on the 662 to avoid mass driver type training Seems a strange choice for a transfer, RATP could have instead loaned this ADH to S (I think S/V ADHs have the same blinds), then sent a 16reg VH to TV?
|
|