|
Post by marlon101 on Apr 16, 2014 18:55:36 GMT
How do you know that the contracted extra vehicle is not a single decker? As no extra did has been allocated to DT this has to remain a possibility. The last contract officially stated 11 new double Deckers, NOT single Deckers. 13 vehicles were ordered. Plus why would a double decker route actually be contracted a single decker working. Are there actually any examples seems silly to provide less capacity. Plus single Deckers have been appearing on the 160 daily ages before hand. I know there are prefect examples of single decker routes contracted double decker workings. Just to step in here, people will note that Metrobus is routinely observing more than one single-decker working on the 160... The argument that it could be allocated an extra SD seems extremely unlikely. This seems even more implausible with the suggestion that it is because DT haven't gained a DD. They haven't gained a SD either... Furthermore the extra bus is there to maintain the service specified in the contract, as opposed to a route enhancement, therefore all the signs suggest that it would be a DD so I shan't labour the point too far. I think the fact that four DWs are off today is quite telling. If they were fit, I'm sure we'd see a fully DD 160...
|
|
|
Post by Danny on Apr 16, 2014 19:06:32 GMT
Day 2: 3985, 4024 on Route 160 Day 3: 3982, 3984 on Route 160 Add 4029 to the list for today
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2014 21:14:09 GMT
Surely this week and possibly next week the 492 is better for SD substitutions as there are no schools for Easter and the route really is DD just for school times. No way the single deck 492 was full last saturday it was a struggle to get on, I certainly would not want to wait half hour for the next bus.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Apr 17, 2014 0:20:48 GMT
How do you know that the contracted extra vehicle is not a single decker? As no extra did has been allocated to DT this has to remain a possibility. The last contract officially stated 11 new double Deckers, NOT single Deckers. 13 vehicles were ordered. Plus why would a double decker route actually be contracted a single decker working. Are there actually any examples seems silly to provide less capacity. Plus single Deckers have been appearing on the 160 daily ages before hand. I know there are prefect examples of single decker routes contracted double decker workings. From my understanding route 160 has been given a PVR increase to 12 this month. Now it may have been argeed behind the scenes by TfL and Arriva that due to shortage of double deckers at DT, the garage could use a single decker as a extra bus for the route. The many appearances of single deckers this week may due to problems with some with DT's double decker fleet.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 17, 2014 6:32:19 GMT
Day 2: 3985, 4024 on Route 160 Day 3: 3982, 3984, 4029 on Route 160 Day 4: 3991 on Route 160
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 17, 2014 7:13:03 GMT
The last contract officially stated 11 new double Deckers, NOT single Deckers. 13 vehicles were ordered. Plus why would a double decker route actually be contracted a single decker working. Are there actually any examples seems silly to provide less capacity. Plus single Deckers have been appearing on the 160 daily ages before hand. I know there are prefect examples of single decker routes contracted double decker workings. From my understanding route 160 has been given a PVR increase to 12 this month. Now it may have been argeed behind the scenes by TfL and Arriva that due to shortage of double deckers at DT, the garage could use a single decker as a extra bus for the route. The many appearances of single deckers this week may due to problems with some with DT's double decker fleet. You'd think though that with various spare DLA's hanging around in the Arriva London fleet, that at least one could be transferred in regardless of whether it'll be looked after or not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 160
Apr 17, 2014 7:50:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2014 7:50:22 GMT
How do you know that the contracted extra vehicle is not a single decker? As no extra did has been allocated to DT this has to remain a possibility. The last contract officially stated 11 new double Deckers, NOT single Deckers. 13 vehicles were ordered. Plus why would a double decker route actually be contracted a single decker working. Are there actually any examples seems silly to provide less capacity. Plus single Deckers have been appearing on the 160 daily ages before hand. I know there are prefect examples of single decker routes contracted double decker workings. Well there are 11 DDs on the route at the moment ... so the 12th vehicle is an extra over and above your specified contractual requirement. Seems some would have been happier if no extra provision had been made at all and the 12th bus was confined to garage.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 17, 2014 8:07:57 GMT
The last contract officially stated 11 new double Deckers, NOT single Deckers. 13 vehicles were ordered. Plus why would a double decker route actually be contracted a single decker working. Are there actually any examples seems silly to provide less capacity. Plus single Deckers have been appearing on the 160 daily ages before hand. I know there are prefect examples of single decker routes contracted double decker workings. Well there are 11 DDs on the route at the moment ... so the 12th vehicle is an extra over and above your specified contractual requirement. Seems some would have been happier if no extra provision had been made at all and the 12th bus was confined to garage. As far as I'm concerned the full allocation should be double decker until any confirmation that the extra bus should be single decker. Firstly, no extra double or single decker has been transferred to DT. The current single Deckers at DT are contracted to other routes. Secondly they both the 160 & 492 have 1 spare each before the 160 PVR increase it was 2 spares which IMO is still no excuse for the 12th bus to be contracted a double decker. Thirdly my point is not no bus should be used, but appropriate double Deckers and not single Deckers every day. A bus is better than no bus yes, but should not be a regular thing like it is on the 160 . Forthly, single Deckers have been common on the 160 for 7.5 years plus the operation of the 160 as a whole has been appalling. Finally, Arriva London should actually provide an appropriate spare vehicle from other routes to provide DT with as they have No excuse as many surplus fleet is around. DLA228 moved for a PVRA increase in the past, there is no reason why a bus cannot be transferred.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Apr 17, 2014 8:08:13 GMT
From my understanding route 160 has been given a PVR increase to 12 this month. Now it may have been argeed behind the scenes by TfL and Arriva that due to shortage of double deckers at DT, the garage could use a single decker as a extra bus for the route. The many appearances of single deckers this week may due to problems with some with DT's double decker fleet. You'd think though that with various spare DLA's hanging around in the Arriva London fleet, that at least one could be transferred in regardless of whether it'll be looked after or not. I would suspect that the spare Arriva London's Euro 2 DLAs are not contractually applicable for a new contract or an adaption of an existing contract. As they are too old and don't fit into London's euro emissions policy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2014 8:26:26 GMT
Well there are 11 DDs on the route at the moment ... so the 12th vehicle is an extra over and above your specified contractual requirement. Seems some would have been happier if no extra provision had been made at all and the 12th bus was confined to garage. As far as I'm concerned the full allocation should be double decker until any confirmation that the extra bus should be single decker. You are speaking as an authority about something you do not have any knowledge of. Neither do I, but making assumptions about things can come back a bite your ass. You may be right, but you could also be very wrong. If there was an option to block threads on the recent posts viewing ... I would not be having this convo.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 17, 2014 8:31:35 GMT
As far as I'm concerned the full allocation should be double decker until any confirmation that the extra bus should be single decker. You are speaking as an authority about something you do not have any knowledge of. Neither do I, but making assumptions about things can come back a bite your ass. You may be right, but you could also be very wrong. If there was an option to block threads on the recent posts viewing ... I would not be having this convo. I agree with this, but at the same time I don't agree with your assumption. Why would TFL even allow an operator to contract a single decker to a double decker route? When schools start again this shouldn't be allowed, the 160 is busy in the peaks.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Apr 17, 2014 8:57:19 GMT
You are speaking as an authority about something you do not have any knowledge of. Neither do I, but making assumptions about things can come back a bite your ass. You may be right, but you could also be very wrong. If there was an option to block threads on the recent posts viewing ... I would not be having this convo. I agree with this, but at the same time I don't agree with your assumption. Why would TFL even allow an operator to contract a single decker to a double decker route? When schools start again this shouldn't be allowed, the 160 is busy in the peaks. But with an awful lot of the Geminis out of action at the moment, it's inevitable that the 160 and/or the 492 will see single decks. Any bus is better than no bus (which is what I kept telling myself a few weeks ago when wedged inside some small East Lancs single deck thing in the evening peak on route 161!...)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 17, 2014 9:23:15 GMT
You'd think though that with various spare DLA's hanging around in the Arriva London fleet, that at least one could be transferred in regardless of whether it'll be looked after or not. I would suspect that the spare Arriva London's Euro 2 DLAs are not contractually applicable for a new contract or an adaption of an existing contract. As they are too old and don't fit into London's euro emissions policy. The 63 gained a PVR of 2 and Go-Ahead allocated two leased 52 reg WVL's, likely as cover until something more acceptable comes along so shouldn't be a big issue. You could be very right though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2014 9:50:15 GMT
It is Easter school break, so no school kids. Roadworks galore, traffic bad pretty much everywhere. The A222 yesterday was blocked back to Bickley from Sidcup for no other reason than sheer weight of traffic. I hate it when a single decker turns up and it should be double deck, but if the single decks are actually coping and not leaving people behind, what is the big problem ( other than alleged contract breaks ) ?
Although DT does seem to have an image problem , looking at the most recent data , the b12,b13 and b15 are run very well. The 286 as well, reliability wise there was nothing wrong according to the data.
The 160 is a low frequency route which traverses ultra congested parts of Catford and Eltham on the South Circular. It is odd in as much I rarely see a very busy 160. I think it must be quite a hard route to keep to time, would another operator be able to do any better given the same resources as Arriva ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2014 11:26:16 GMT
Having been in Catford and the surrounding areas a lot over the last few months, I have to agree with @rgd976, I have never actually seen an extremely busy 160 even in the peak periods. All the SD workings I've seen on the 160 have been in the off-peak and there are probably economic reasons behind why Arriva KT choose to allocate the route SDs as opposed to DDs in this period.
|
|