|
Post by WSD3 on Nov 9, 2019 17:45:07 GMT
Looks like the 332 will be then next route to be converted to routemasters?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 9, 2019 18:41:36 GMT
Looks like the 332 will be then next route to be converted to routemasters? It seeing LT's has nothing to do with that. it was done for operational reasons I believe.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 9, 2019 21:01:24 GMT
Looks like the 332 will be then next route to be converted to routemasters? Precisley as vjaska says. They inserted the 332 onto their LT blinds as once the 266 is lost, the 13-reg TEHs will go to G for the 282. This will mean W won't have enough 15-reg TEHs for the 332 so they're going to use LTs on the route too.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Nov 9, 2019 21:27:40 GMT
Looks like the 332 will be then next route to be converted to routemasters? Precisley as vjaska says. They inserted the 332 onto their LT blinds as once the 266 is lost, the 13-reg TEHs will go to G for the 282. This will mean W won't have enough 15-reg TEHs for the 332 so they're going to use LTs on the route too. There are 2 remaining 61reg TEHs at W (which did not transfer to EW) - these are allocated to the 332 as top ups to the MMCs to complete the allocation. I imagine the LTs are only blinded as a backup vehicle to use, as no other W routes will have compliant conventional hybrids after the 13reg leave. LTs may end up making regular apperances on the 332 as they previously did on the 32, but by no means will be allocated.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 9, 2019 21:30:49 GMT
Precisley as vjaska says. They inserted the 332 onto their LT blinds as once the 266 is lost, the 13-reg TEHs will go to G for the 282. This will mean W won't have enough 15-reg TEHs for the 332 so they're going to use LTs on the route too. There are 2 remaining 61reg TEHs at W (which did not transfer to EW) - these are allocated to the 332 as top ups to the MMCs to complete the allocation. I imagine the LTs are only blinded as a backup vehicle to use, as no other W routes will have compliant conventional hybrids after the 13reg leave. LTs may end up making regular apperances on the 332 as they previously did on the 32, but by no means will be allocated. Well it does give W a flexible batch of EuroVI LTs to use as they can now form a common user pool between the 16, 168, 189, and 332. Interestingly, there are nineteen 13-reg TEHs (TEH1449-67) but the 282 only requires eighteen, so I wonder if all will transfer to give G an additional TEH, this additional bus could also see use on the 95!
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Nov 10, 2019 20:56:24 GMT
There are 2 remaining 61reg TEHs at W (which did not transfer to EW) - these are allocated to the 332 as top ups to the MMCs to complete the allocation. I imagine the LTs are only blinded as a backup vehicle to use, as no other W routes will have compliant conventional hybrids after the 13reg leave. LTs may end up making regular apperances on the 332 as they previously did on the 32, but by no means will be allocated. Well it does give W a flexible batch of EuroVI LTs to use as they can now form a common user pool between the 16, 168, 189, and 332. Interestingly, there are nineteen 13-reg TEHs (TEH1449-67) but the 282 only requires eighteen, so I wonder if all will transfer to give G an additional TEH, this additional bus could also see use on the 95! I thought W had enough 15reg TEHs for the 332 PVR?
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 10, 2019 21:35:26 GMT
Well it does give W a flexible batch of EuroVI LTs to use as they can now form a common user pool between the 16, 168, 189, and 332. Interestingly, there are nineteen 13-reg TEHs (TEH1449-67) but the 282 only requires eighteen, so I wonder if all will transfer to give G an additional TEH, this additional bus could also see use on the 95! I thought W had enough 15reg TEHs for the 332 PVR? They have sixteen 15-reg TEHs (TEH2072-88) for a PVR of sixteen. I'm just regurgitating what I've heard though when I say W won't have enough.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 10, 2019 23:35:01 GMT
I thought W had enough 15reg TEHs for the 332 PVR? They have sixteen 15-reg TEHs (TEH2072-88) for a PVR of sixteen. I'm just regurgitating what I've heard though when I say W won't have enough. The 332 has a PVR of 15 according to LBR so having 16 buses could be classed as enough.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 11, 2019 7:36:53 GMT
They have sixteen 15-reg TEHs (TEH2072-88) for a PVR of sixteen. I'm just regurgitating what I've heard though when I say W won't have enough. The 332 has a PVR of 15 according to LBR so having 16 buses could be classed as enough. I was looking at LBR too but must have confused the number of buses with the PVR.
|
|
|
Post by BK15AZR on Nov 11, 2019 11:07:35 GMT
Totally out of fantasy, I would rather like to see 98 converted to LT, making Oxford Street the LT exclusive zone.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 11, 2019 11:10:48 GMT
I did think in the early days the 98 would have been a candidate if simply to allow the old VPs to be withdrawn back in 2014/15. The 98 along with the 2 and 45 were really the last hold outs for the first generation low floor buses.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 11, 2019 11:12:19 GMT
I did think in the early days the 98 would have been a candidate if simply to allow the old VPs to be withdrawn back in 2014/15. The 98 along with the 2 and 45 were really the last hold outs for the first generation low floor buses. As was the 4, 17 & 43
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 11, 2019 11:59:02 GMT
And 176 aswell.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Nov 11, 2019 13:37:30 GMT
Totally out of fantasy, I would rather like to see 98 converted to LT, making Oxford Street the LT exclusive zone. No thanks. No particular area should be 'LT exclusive' as this would lead to the constant boredom of seeing one bus type everywhere you look. At least the 7, 94, 98, 113 and 139 bring more variety along Oxford Street, more so along the western section.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 11, 2019 20:17:51 GMT
Totally out of fantasy, I would rather like to see 98 converted to LT, making Oxford Street the LT exclusive zone. No thanks. No particular area should be 'LT exclusive' as this would lead to the constant boredom of seeing one bus type everywhere you look. At least the 7, 94, 98, 113 and 139 bring more variety along Oxford Street, more so along the western section. It would make Oxford Street East an LT exclusive zone though. I don't want LTs on either the 94 or 98. I use both routes quite a lot and love that they both have conventionals, better still, that Oxford Street only has a single LT route nowadays in the 390.
|
|