|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 17, 2019 10:25:03 GMT
So, those new mirrorless buses (digital screens in the cab) have entered service today on the 209/378. Does anyone have any feedback on this as I would find it odd. You would very quickly get used to it. Bus drivers are trained professionals and are able to get to grips with new technology. And CCTV is already used for the interior of buses. The new digital monitors are safer - they reduce blind spots, and also eliminate the risk of pedestrians being hit by wing mirrors. They are also lees likely to be damaged or knocked off by passing vehicles, or by getting too close to bus stops and shelters (one once landed inches from my feet).
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Aug 17, 2019 10:39:36 GMT
To top up the new YW19 MMCs on the 209/378 (due to PVR increase of the route splitting), could SE291-292 transfer to AF? These are the only other E200MMCs in the fleet, giving a uniform type, and are of the correct number of top ups needed. These will be available anyway after the P5 is lost, and the P5 could use a few older vehicle on a temporary basis until end of contract. These MMCs are 9.8m in length, so are not much shorter than the 10.2m DEs they would be replacing. Go Ahead could always restrict them to the quietest of the two Mortlake routes if needed. I wouldn't bet against it happening, especially as they're being made redundant from the P5 soon. I had them in mind to potentially move to the 434 should the extension to Cane Hill go ahead, since there's only two of them but that won't be decided for a while yet, and the extension if it goes ahead won't be implemented until next year
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Aug 17, 2019 11:02:02 GMT
So, those new mirrorless buses (digital screens in the cab) have entered service today on the 209/378. Does anyone have any feedback on this as I would find it odd. And if it packs up? Bus taken OOS? That's progress is it? Yes, but less likely to get knocked needing to be taken OOS
|
|
|
Post by 10121ddo on Aug 17, 2019 11:57:15 GMT
Observation: E75 has a nice whistle to it as it accelerates. And last time I caught E69 on the 101, it was smoking up any car on its right - can anyone confirm if this is still the case?
|
|
|
Post by MrMaguire on Aug 17, 2019 12:06:19 GMT
Observation: E75 has a nice whistle to it as it accelerates. And last time I caught E69 on the 101, it was smoking up any car on its right - can anyone confirm if this is still the case? It was doing that when I was on it about a month ago on rail replacement.
|
|
|
Post by MoEnviro on Aug 17, 2019 12:43:06 GMT
To top up the new YW19 MMCs on the 209/378 (due to PVR increase of the route splitting), could SE291-292 transfer to AF? These are the only other E200MMCs in the fleet, giving a uniform type, and are of the correct number of top ups needed. These will be available anyway after the P5 is lost, and the P5 could use a few older vehicle on a temporary basis until end of contract. These MMCs are 9.8m in length, so are not much shorter than the 10.2m DEs they would be replacing. Go Ahead could always restrict them to the quietest of the two Mortlake routes if needed. I wouldn't bet against it happening, especially as they're being made redundant from the P5 soon. I had them in mind to potentially move to the 434 should the extension to Cane Hill go ahead, since there's only two of them but that won't be decided for a while yet, and the extension if it goes ahead won't be implemented until next year Can we just be clear, there is no PVR increase due to the 209/378 splitting
|
|
|
Post by MoEnviro on Aug 17, 2019 12:47:29 GMT
What’s the official PVR of the 209 now under GAL? There’s conflicting information, I don’t know how you find the official number on TfL’s website where the schedules are etc. There’s 7 on the route at the moment, LBR.net has the PVR as 6 so I’m unsure as to the actual figure. The 378 I’m pretty certain is 5. The PVR figure on TfL will be on the working timetables but they are taking their time putting them on there. The old ones for the 208 and 232 are still on there at the moment 5 on the 209 and 5 on the 378, the problem comes that because the buses are swapping routes a lot, LVF lags behind as is currently showing the same two buses on both routes.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Aug 17, 2019 14:33:53 GMT
The 209's PVR is 6 whilst the 378's PVR is 5. There are 11 19-plate SEs at AF. Therefore instead of the 209 having a PVR of 10 with a single spare the 209/378 both have low PVRs and neither route has a spare
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Aug 17, 2019 15:01:04 GMT
Went to visit a different garage yesterday for once other than Croydon, and for the very first time it was the second Metrobus London garage of Orpington! The album can be found here: flic.kr/s/aHsmGcjsZkChanged the blinds on quite a lot of buses, but an interesting thing to note is that the MB engineers have managed to reprogram the blinds, mainly on the Enviro200's so that they are unable to show routes that they have lost on the blindset, they include routes 146, 181, 284, 336 and 464. The blind controllers was also able to show where there would be no side blind available, such as when route 227 or R5/R10 is selected as the E200's don't appear to have the inserts for them yet. I hadn't seen anything like this before, so it was interesting to see. Some of the highlights include: 732 blinded for routes R8 and 138
MEC53 blinded for route 293 to Epsom Hospital757 blinded for routes 138, 162, 227, 352, R3 and R8
E95 blinded for routes 161 and 246 EH322 blinded for routes 51, 119, 246, 353 and 320. 188 blinded for routes 126, R4 and R8. SE290 blinded for routes 358 and R5 - This bus was the only one of the ZF E200's at MB (SE261-267/288-290) to have route R5/R10 on the blinds, but only the front number blind has it as its original front number blind ripped, it has yet to receive inserts for the rest of the blinds. Also saw WS2 looking sorry for itself outside the engineering bay after it suffered an engine failure on July 2nd whilst on route R3. Looks like it's going to be out of service for a while yet. I gained a great insight of how operations at Orpington ran, it runs much the same way as Croydon being a Metrobus garage originally and learned lot too, such as the cost associated with transferring buses from the Go-Ahead to the Metrobus iBus agency, which is very high for one bus! I also got to take a look at the new iBus room currently under construction. The desks are all in place, so all that's required is the equipment before it is ready for use. It was an absolutely fantastic visit to a garage where I've not been before but have started using their services a lot more often since my dad moved to the local area, and I must thank the management team at Orpington (and Croydon for putting me in contact with Orpington) for giving me the opportunity to visit the garage!
|
|
|
Post by schedcomp on Aug 17, 2019 16:01:10 GMT
The 209's PVR is 6 whilst the 378's PVR is 5. There are 11 19-plate SEs at AF. Therefore instead of the 209 having a PVR of 10 with a single spare the 209/378 both have low PVRs and neither route has a spare I am not sure where 11 is coming from as PVR is 10 across both routes. As they change all day it is not worth worrying about individual PVR figures.
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 17, 2019 16:03:04 GMT
The 209's PVR is 6 whilst the 378's PVR is 5. There are 11 19-plate SEs at AF. Therefore instead of the 209 having a PVR of 10 with a single spare the 209/378 both have low PVRs and neither route has a spare I am not sure where 11 is coming from as PVR is 10 across both routes. As they change all day it is not worth worrying about individual PVR figures. 11 was the original PVR for the 209 before the bridge closure. When the tender was announced it was awarded with 10 buses.
|
|
|
Post by Londonbuses54 on Aug 17, 2019 16:42:54 GMT
So much for the new e-mirrors..... just seen one be hit by a 414 anyway
|
|
|
Post by richard on Aug 17, 2019 17:40:04 GMT
So much for the new e-mirrors..... just seen one be hit by a 414 anyway TFL will regret this soon
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 17, 2019 17:41:57 GMT
So much for the new e-mirrors..... just seen one be hit by a 414 anyway TFL will regret this soon No they won't. It is highly likely that if the vehicle had had a conventional mirror that would have been damaged anyway.
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 17, 2019 17:47:30 GMT
So much for the new e-mirrors..... just seen one be hit by a 414 anyway I'm guessing it was SE295 that was involved. As rightly pointed out by wirewiper that if the bus had a conventional mirror it would have still have been damaged.
|
|