|
Post by SILENCED on Jan 27, 2020 15:13:16 GMT
This month's TLB reports that some VMHs on route 134 are earmarked for route 139. So, route 139 could use existing VMHs topped up with new ones. I notice that, whereas ex-First E200s are being replaced by indigenous examples, ex-First E400s are mainly staying put with indigenous ones withdrawn instead. Read TLB again, it does not say "VMH". Besides, has the Copyright rule about not sharing TLB information on internet sites been relaxed of late or did you receive permission from the Editor? Can you copyright information that is not yours. The article and the way it is reported could be copyrighted, but if more than 1 party has the information, I don't see how it can be. Can company X has order Y amounts of bus type Z be copyrighted, when LOTS as a third party is just passing on information recieved, which is not even data they own ... I don't think it can. If you replicated articles word for word then you would breach copyright. If you precis a one page article into 4 or 5 lines, that 4 or 5 lines becomes your piece of work rather than that of the original author.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 27, 2020 16:44:28 GMT
The correct term is actually “Plagarism” and from reading the above, it hasn’t been done. Remember its a discussion forum, so nothing wrong with quoting information from elsewhere... tbh it’s better than reading some of the new pointless discussions threads that keep creeping up.
Overall the majority of information is available on many sources, not just LOTs. I would say LOTs is just way behind with information and technology these days as most things become public knowledge long before it gets published in LOTs.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 27, 2020 18:28:33 GMT
How things change - I remember when certain individuals wanted me banned from here for doing similar.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2020 19:15:00 GMT
Route 240 has had it's iBus updated to feature the 'Station' suffixes for both termini.
|
|
|
Post by VWH1414 on Jan 27, 2020 19:27:51 GMT
Route 240 has had it's iBus updated to feature the 'Station' suffixes for both termini. I noticed this yesterday on my 240 trip - I wonder if that will slowly become standard now for routes that terminate at Edgware and Golders Green - I've noticed more blindsets appear in recent times that say "Edgware Station" rather than just "Edgware" by itself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2020 19:29:07 GMT
This month's TLB reports that some VMHs on route 134 are earmarked for route 139. So, route 139 could use existing VMHs topped up with new ones. I notice that, whereas ex-First E200s are being replaced by indigenous examples, ex-First E400s are mainly staying put with indigenous ones withdrawn instead. The tender was won on the basis of using a mix of new and existing hybrid vehicles (VWHs ex-route 52 - upgraded to Euro VI). This may change of course, so VMHs could well end up being used.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2020 19:35:12 GMT
Route 240 has had it's iBus updated to feature the 'Station' suffixes for both termini. I noticed this yesterday on my 240 trip - I wonder if that will slowly become standard now for routes that terminate at Edgware and Golders Green - I've noticed more blindsets appear in recent times that say "Edgware Station" rather than just "Edgware" by itself. The iBus was changed following a customer suggestion for route 240 specifically, so it isn't becoming the norm just yet. It would make sense to have all buses terminating at Edgware and Golders Green updated to be consistent however.
|
|
|
Post by VWH1414 on Jan 27, 2020 19:38:46 GMT
I noticed this yesterday on my 240 trip - I wonder if that will slowly become standard now for routes that terminate at Edgware and Golders Green - I've noticed more blindsets appear in recent times that say "Edgware Station" rather than just "Edgware" by itself. The iBus was changed following a customer suggestion for route 240 specifically, so it isn't becoming the norm just yet. It would make sense to have all buses terminating at Edgware and Golders Green updated to be consistent however. Fair enough, but I notice recent blind sets at both BT & EW have slowly been appearing with Edgware Station instead of just Edgware - 79 is another example that has appeared with it of late, a lot of the re-blinded EW TEs also contain the "Station" at the end. Would make sense to have it all consistent eventually - which hopefully they will do .
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Jan 27, 2020 19:43:44 GMT
How many VMHs are left to transfer to PA for the 90?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2020 19:45:16 GMT
The iBus was changed following a customer suggestion for route 240 specifically, so it isn't becoming the norm just yet. It would make sense to have all buses terminating at Edgware and Golders Green updated to be consistent however. Fair enough, but I notice recent blind sets at both BT & EW have slowly been appearing with Edgware Station instead of just Edgware - 79 is another example that has appeared with it of late, a lot of the re-blinded EW TEs also contain the "Station" at the end. Would make sense to have it all consistent eventually - which hopefully they will do . Totally agree, it is becoming more common now to see more specific blindsets and would be good for this to continue. It seemed to go from having main via points on the front blind back in the olden days (even more recently as seen with TAs for example), to having single word blinds like 'Victoria' or 'Edgware', to now having blinds such as 'Brunel University via Hillingdon Station'!
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jan 27, 2020 19:47:01 GMT
How many VMHs are left to transfer to PA for the 90? At least 8 from PB I don't think anymore will go from KC
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2020 19:53:43 GMT
How many VMHs are left to transfer to PA for the 90? At least 8 from PB I don't think anymore will go from KC You're right 8 are still left to transfer with the 31 now being fully VMH
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jan 27, 2020 19:57:53 GMT
At least 8 from PB I don't think anymore will go from KC You're right 8 are still left to transfer with the 31 now being fully VMH There are still 4 SELs at PA those VMHs will see them off
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jan 27, 2020 20:04:31 GMT
This month's TLB reports that some VMHs on route 134 are earmarked for route 139. So, route 139 could use existing VMHs topped up with new ones. I notice that, whereas ex-First E200s are being replaced by indigenous examples, ex-First E400s are mainly staying put with indigenous ones withdrawn instead. The tender was won on the basis of using a mix of new and existing hybrid vehicles (VWHs ex-route 52 - upgraded to Euro VI). This may change of course, so VMHs could well end up being used. If that's true, perhaps the 139 will have the same vehicle types as currently under RATP, with a mix of G2 and G3 B5LHs? Though I think it was mentioned that G3/B5LHs are no longer available, with Wright currently only producing Streetdecks. So could be G2 VWHs plus new VMHs? Though unlikely, I wonder if Metroline could order B5LH/MMCs for the 139, keeping with W's mostly ADL fleet, while continuing to order Metroline's favoured B5LHs? Or even standard TEHs for standardisation with the 332's allocation?
|
|
|
Post by george on Jan 27, 2020 20:44:56 GMT
How things change - I remember when certain individuals wanted me banned from here for doing similar. I don't know why it was suddenly brought up when nearly every sunday someone copies and paste from LOTs and nothing gets mentioned.
|
|