|
Post by rj131 on Nov 10, 2019 19:28:49 GMT
24 - LT19-40 (yes, quite a surplus) 27 - No idea, it’s a great hot mess. The screenshot below shows it lol 267 - LT149/50, LTZ984-1000. Some transfers still to take place though. It really hurts my OCD that RATP sent LT91-94 and LT151-171/174 to Abellio, looks very unpleasant on LVF to see those gaps but that's just me being a pedant Thanks for that Total list: 24 : LT19-40 27 : LT91-94, LT151-171, LT174 267 : LT149/150, LT984-1000
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 10, 2019 19:33:20 GMT
It really hurts my OCD that RATP sent LT91-94 and LT151-171/174 to Abellio, looks very unpleasant on LVF to see those gaps but that's just me being a pedant Thanks for that Total list: 24 : LT19-40 27 : LT91-94, LT151-171, LT174 267 : LT149/150, LT984-1000 Hmm, the 24 gets twenty-two LTs for a PVR of 17, the 27 gets twenty-six LTs for a PVR of twenty-two. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I just can't put my finger on it...
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Nov 10, 2019 19:47:02 GMT
Thanks for that Total list: 24 : LT19-40 27 : LT91-94, LT151-171, LT174 267 : LT149/150, LT984-1000 Hmm, the 24 gets twenty-two LTs for a PVR of 17, the 27 gets twenty-six LTs for a PVR of twenty-two. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I just can't put my finger on it... Might just be the more LTs the operator shoves onto another one, the less leasing cost they have to pay having that many LTs for the 24 pretty much guaranteed the observation you want to see (conventional on the 24 and 27) won’t happen lol
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 10, 2019 19:49:14 GMT
Hmm, the 24 gets twenty-two LTs for a PVR of 17, the 27 gets twenty-six LTs for a PVR of twenty-two. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I just can't put my finger on it... Might just be the more LTs the operator shoves onto another one, the less leasing cost they have to pay having that many LTs for the 24 pretty much guaranteed the observation you want to see (conventional on the 24 and 27) won’t happen lol I think you're right. I don't think its out of the question to suggest another route at QB could see the odd LT if they have surplus ones knocking around but very unlikely.
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Nov 10, 2019 20:50:02 GMT
Thanks for that Total list: 24 : LT19-40 27 : LT91-94, LT151-171, LT174 267 : LT149/150, LT984-1000 Hmm, the 24 gets twenty-two LTs for a PVR of 17, the 27 gets twenty-six LTs for a PVR of twenty-two. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I just can't put my finger on it... The extras could be refurb cover (for both batches). Now that the early LTs are starting new contracts it's about time they got a lick of paint at least. HT had quite a surplus of LTs (on paper) so not surprising that the extras came from Metroline rather than LU.
|
|
|
Post by george on Nov 10, 2019 21:16:05 GMT
Might just be the more LTs the operator shoves onto another one, the less leasing cost they have to pay having that many LTs for the 24 pretty much guaranteed the observation you want to see (conventional on the 24 and 27) won’t happen lol I think you're right. I don't think its out of the question to suggest another route at QB could see the odd LT if they have surplus ones knocking around but very unlikely. if that was too happen would probably be 156 which has been cleared for LTs.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 10, 2019 21:27:13 GMT
Thanks for that Total list: 24 : LT19-40 27 : LT91-94, LT151-171, LT174 267 : LT149/150, LT984-1000 Hmm, the 24 gets twenty-two LTs for a PVR of 17, the 27 gets twenty-six LTs for a PVR of twenty-two. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I just can't put my finger on it... Some of the spare stats quoted on here a unrealistic if you expect any kind of service. Very MINIMUM,, 12% needed
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 10, 2019 21:38:01 GMT
Hmm, the 24 gets twenty-two LTs for a PVR of 17, the 27 gets twenty-six LTs for a PVR of twenty-two. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I just can't put my finger on it... Some of the spare stats quoted on here a unrealistic if you expect any kind of service. Very MINIMUM,, 12% needed Over the last year since LT's have started moving between operators, there has been a tendency to trim down the spares on routes that have previously had an excess so it's surprising to see the 24 & 27 gaining more than required (3 extra for 24 and currently 1 extra for 27/N27) and equally surprising that the 27's lot are not in sequence as has genrally been the case with LT movements regardless of operator. The 267 in comparison has come over with the expected amount of 19 LT's.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 10, 2019 21:42:46 GMT
I think you're right. I don't think its out of the question to suggest another route at QB could see the odd LT if they have surplus ones knocking around but very unlikely. if that was too happen would probably be 156 which has been cleared for LTs. As long as they stay away from the 49
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Nov 10, 2019 21:43:46 GMT
I think you're right. I don't think its out of the question to suggest another route at QB could see the odd LT if they have surplus ones knocking around but very unlikely. if that was too happen would probably be 156 which has been cleared for LTs. Hypothetically speaking if a route was to be picked it could be the 45 as it allow MMC E40H to be freed up for use elsewhere within the fleet or for potential new contracts.
|
|
|
Post by george on Nov 10, 2019 21:43:57 GMT
if that was too happen would probably be 156 which has been cleared for LTs. As long as they stay away from the 49 . Agreed, what a route the 49 is.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 10, 2019 21:44:59 GMT
Some of the spare stats quoted on here a unrealistic if you expect any kind of service. Very MINIMUM,, 12% needed Over the last year since LT's have started moving between operators, there has been a tendency to trim down the spares on routes that have previously had an excess so it's surprising to see the 24 & 27 gaining more than required (3 extra for 24 and currently 1 extra for 27/N27) and equally surprising that the 27's lot are not in sequence as has genrally been the case with LT movements regardless of operator. The 267 in comparison has come over with the expected amount of 19 LT's. I guess the only reason Abellio recieved LT91-94 instead of LT145-48 was because RATP decided to avoid busical chairs with the 148's LTs, LT145-47 being at S. I still can't help but think that LT148 is wasted at V though...
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Nov 10, 2019 21:45:49 GMT
Some of the spare stats quoted on here a unrealistic if you expect any kind of service. Very MINIMUM,, 12% needed Over the last year since LT's have started moving between operators, there has been a tendency to trim down the spares on routes that have previously had an excess so it's surprising to see the 24 & 27 gaining more than required (3 extra for 24 and currently 1 extra for 27/N27) and equally surprising that the 27's lot are not in sequence as has genrally been the case with LT movements regardless of operator. The 267 in comparison has come over with the expected amount of 19 LT's. I’m not surprised at all QB got 26 LTs for the 27. After the 27 got converted to LT operation (ie cut from Chiswick) the PVR with LU was cut to 23 so its 26 LTs were sourced for the route. Abellio shaved this PVR to 22 of their own accord, so LU wouldn’t want to honour this by only sending them 25 lumbering them with an extra LT that they have to pay extra for by holding onto it. That’s my thinking anyway.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Nov 10, 2019 21:46:44 GMT
if that was too happen would probably be 156 which has been cleared for LTs. As long as they stay away from the 49 It wouldn't work anyway due to the left turn from Fulham Road into Sydney Place, which is where the LT evaluation had failed for the 14 and 414.
|
|
|
Post by Max B on Nov 11, 2019 6:56:16 GMT
LT464 AE > AR. LT466 AE > AR. LT475 AE > AR.
|
|