|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 22, 2014 6:30:20 GMT
Week 2 Day 8: 3984 on Route 160 Day 9: 3989, 4029 on Route 160
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Apr 22, 2014 6:41:39 GMT
Are the Geminis being used for Rail Replacement or something? Seem strange that they would put a single decker out when they have loads of double dockers sitting in the garage... Nope up to 4 of 7 Gemini's have been off the road for some time for some reason. Thankfully, they will be gone when route 492's new contract starts.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Apr 22, 2014 8:25:59 GMT
Nope up to 4 of 7 Gemini's have been off the road for some time for some reason. Thankfully, they will be gone when route 492's new contract starts. But they were OK when new. I'm no fan of DLAs, but Dartford turned their DLAs into unreliable heaps of misery. I'm sure a great deal of DT's woes are caused by inadequate bus maintenance, and that they're able to keep up to TfL's performance figures by using rogue single decks on ostensibly double deck routes...
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 22, 2014 8:57:25 GMT
Thankfully, they will be gone when route 492's new contract starts. But they were OK when new. I'm no fan of DLAs, but Dartford turned their DLAs into unreliable heaps of misery. I'm sure a great deal of DT's woes are caused by inadequate bus maintenance, and that they're able to keep up to TfL's performance figures by using rogue single decks on ostensibly double deck routes... Indeed, over here at Arriva London South, by & large, we look after our DLA's & DW's. Like the former 160 DLA's, I can see the DW's begin working properly once they leave DT.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 22, 2014 9:38:22 GMT
But they were OK when new. I'm no fan of DLAs, but Dartford turned their DLAs into unreliable heaps of misery. I'm sure a great deal of DT's woes are caused by inadequate bus maintenance, and that they're able to keep up to TfL's performance figures by using rogue single decks on ostensibly double deck routes... Indeed, over here at Arriva London South, by & large, we look after our DLA's & DW's. Like the former 160 DLA's, I can see the DW's begin working properly once they leave DT. Exactly, BN and TC DW's work fine. The problem clearly is DT!
|
|
|
Post by southeastlondonbus on Apr 22, 2014 14:05:04 GMT
Week 2 Day 8: 3984 on Route 160 Day 9: 3989 on Route 160 4029 has now joined it.
|
|
|
Post by RM5chris on Apr 22, 2014 14:58:54 GMT
Quite amusing that for all the comments about a poor service, on the London's Transport Yahoo group a list of the top 20worst High and Low frequency routes has been published for the period September-January 2014....the 160 made neither list.
So those moaning about it....you're obviously better off than those using the 289 (which is the worst low frequency route, followed by the 201 and 203 for the top 3)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 160
Apr 22, 2014 15:19:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2014 15:19:46 GMT
Quite amusing that for all the comments about a poor service, on the London's Transport Yahoo group a list of the top 20worst High and Low frequency routes has been published for the period September-January 2014....the 160 made neither list. So those moaning about it....you're obviously better off than those using the 289 (which is the worst low frequency route, followed by the 201 and 203 for the top 3) So much for the comments on here that Arriva run the 289 well! No surprise there at all, and still people on this forum say Arriva run the route well
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Apr 22, 2014 18:02:18 GMT
Quite amusing that for all the comments about a poor service, on the London's Transport Yahoo group a list of the top 20worst High and Low frequency routes has been published for the period September-January 2014....the 160 made neither list. So those moaning about it....you're obviously better off than those using the 289 (which is the worst low frequency route, followed by the 201 and 203 for the top 3) Two wrongs do not make a right and whatever the whys and wherefores, the 160 is all but a high frequency route running less capacity than is paid for and often gaps in the service emerge at the worst times, i.e. at peak. I spent a whole week trying to catch a certain 160 service at around 8.15 and it didn't show any day at all. Figures can only show you so much...
|
|
|
Post by RM5chris on Apr 22, 2014 18:49:56 GMT
Quite amusing that for all the comments about a poor service, on the London's Transport Yahoo group a list of the top 20worst High and Low frequency routes has been published for the period September-January 2014....the 160 made neither list. So those moaning about it....you're obviously better off than those using the 289 (which is the worst low frequency route, followed by the 201 and 203 for the top 3) Two wrongs do not make a right and whatever the whys and wherefores, the 160 is all but a high frequency route running less capacity than is paid for and often gaps in the service emerge at the worst times, i.e. at peak. I spent a whole week trying to catch a certain 160 service at around 8.15 and it didn't show any day at all. Figures can only show you so much... I agree but....just because people think they are getting a poor service doesn't necessarily mean that they are. A lot of the posts are opinion - I could say my local route is terrible - doesn't make it so though does it? At least I have mentioned an official stat (which at least shows it is not the worst high or low frequency route during a recent period) - however at present the stats cant record figures for all day everyday?
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Apr 22, 2014 19:52:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 22, 2014 20:26:24 GMT
Can I give this post 32,156,457 "likes" please? Some common sense being spoken.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2014 21:15:43 GMT
Quite amusing that for all the comments about a poor service, on the London's Transport Yahoo group a list of the top 20worst High and Low frequency routes has been published for the period September-January 2014....the 160 made neither list. So those moaning about it....you're obviously better off than those using the 289 (which is the worst low frequency route, followed by the 201 and 203 for the top 3) So much for the comments on here that Arriva run the 289 well! Looking at how the results are weighted and the best and worst performance tables ... It seems it is easy for the lightest used low frequency routes to produce the best results and the heaviest the worst. As the 289 is the 2nd heaviest used route (in the tables), then the fact that it is top is no surprise ... and if you have ever driven along the Purley Way, you will know sometimes it will take 10 minutes ...other times 90 ... so not the easiest environment for a heavily used low frequncy route. Oh and the 162 which has done so well since moving to MB is amongst the worst performing routes (whilst the 160 is not)
|
|
|
Post by jay38a on Apr 22, 2014 21:37:37 GMT
So much for the comments on here that Arriva run the 289 well! Looking at how the results are weighted and the best and worst performance tables ... It seems it is easy for the lightest used low frequency routes to produce the best results and the heaviest the worst. As the 289 is the 2nd heaviest used route (in the tables), then the fact that it is top is no surprise ... and if you have ever driven along the Purley Way, you will know sometimes it will take 10 minutes ...other times 90 ... so not the easiest environment for a heavily used low frequncy route. Oh and the 162 which has done so well since moving to MB is amongst the worst performing routes (whilst the 160 is not) The one problem with the 162 is there is way too much running time on a standard day, ive been 13 mins late at Chislehurst but by the time ive got to Bromley im on time and same in reverse, how does that work, so you can see what its like if your on time at Chislehurst or Bromley, your hanging around everywhere.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 22, 2014 21:57:55 GMT
So much for the comments on here that Arriva run the 289 well! No surprise there at all, and still people on this forum say Arriva run the route well I stand by what I said before - the traffic causes all the 289's problems and I've no problem with Arriva's performance of the route - they do the best they can. When you've a road like Purley Way that attracts traffic to it in the same way as dung attracts flies, any route will suffer. Add in the fact that London Road suffers badly from traffic along with Lower Addiscombe Road right down to Ashburton Park and it makes life difficult for any operator. The route is also in need of DD's - both the PDL's & ENX's were & are rammed solid constantly.
|
|