|
Post by Towielad on Jan 6, 2021 21:00:38 GMT
A few people have been suggesting potential routes WD could operate but I am curious what the capacity of WD would be and how many of those potential routes it could actually fit in. I'm concerned about finding the drivers that would want to go to WD, given where it is placed? Don’t forget a large proportion of the OLST staff are presumably currently on furlough and likely to be that way for the foreseeable future they may well be glad of proper wages
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Jan 6, 2021 20:56:54 GMT
There are a lot of guesses and assumptions being thrown about. Whilst NC is rented, I think (but not sure) EB may be owned. EB had a lot of money invested in new buildings a decade ago, so the site may raise a bit. There are basically two things that can be done with any proceeds : bank the cash; or use it to upgrade (or buy) something else. So if for now, we assume any proceeds get spent, could be used to upgrade another garage (eg electrification) or open another better sited garage. Don’t forget RP only got a 10 year lease which is already a few years in, so long term plan for routes at RP needs to be made. Regarding the buses used on routes going to Go Ahead, unless anyone has seen the full agreement rather than the summary, it isn’t clear if the buses are transferring (permanently), or just loaned for fixed period (giving GoAhead time to source replacements, before returning them). There is quite a distinction because the value of taking on non-standard types would be quite low (and RATP would probably have a book loss if them had to give them away cheap. I also suspect contracts are being novated (a legal term for reassigned and taken over), rather than won as some people have stated. Sadly the GoAhead notice seems to have been written for a dumbed down audience (called colleagues) rather than have specific terminology, so leaves the detail unanswered I think the demise of NC is probably due to the threat of other operators taking it to aid tender wins has now significantly diminished. The 111 is the next significant tender in the area and isn’t exactly ideally sited for that route. Nor is Abellios Fulwell or Metrolines Brentford for that matter. NC as an operational depot is limited due to time clauses on operation after 22:00 and before 07:00 so the “threat” of another operator using it is non existent
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Nov 23, 2020 18:13:17 GMT
Some good wins of late and now the 49 returning to LU after 7 years
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Dec 8, 2019 18:03:42 GMT
10121ddo - CT Plus (or what is now known as HCT Group) has just recently acquired few of the ex First/Metroline 11 reg Enviro 200's (The same former Greenford batch that TT got some for the 218) as top ups for the W19's frequency increase on Weekdays to every 10 mins starting from next Monday.
One of the acquired was ex DE1909 which entered service on the W19 yesterday with 1338 as the new fleet number and that entered service on the W19 in a very scruffy state on the outside with the front destination and the side blinds that was displaying blank - flic.kr/p/2hVGjBcI've always seen CT+ buses in very great condition and well kept but then I saw that and it horrifies me that has been allowed to enter service in such a state, I honestly hope this example is refurbished in the coming weeks as I find that state is totally unacceptable, interior wise and exterior wise, there was a lot of dust accumulated on the seats and a women actually complained to the driver as she had something from the seat on her dress, this was on one of the first trips on the W19 yesterday. You should the state of some of the CT plus fleet here in Leeds they truly are in a scruffy state!
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Apr 15, 2019 7:57:48 GMT
BT's 13-reg VHs have been straying on the the 79 a lot more lately. I actually got a 13-reg VH on the 79 not long ago (at first I was so confused to see a Gemini 2 body blinded for the 79, a callback to the route in its Metroline days, before realising it was a BT VH). If the 139 does get new buses I can see them keeping the 13-reg VHs for the 79 seeing as RATP are trying to oust all their SPs There is no definitive evidence to suggest RATP is ousting their Scanias at all - the ex 10 SP's are leased whilst the only other SP's to have left were some of the 56 reg which I believe were also leased. The 406 is expected to converT to SP's in due course. Currently a batch of SP’s at Sovereign Recovery depot near Hitchin parked up, indeed SP40183 currently on demo with Trustybus in Harlow with a view to replace single decks on their very busy 420 network
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Nov 5, 2018 22:46:49 GMT
Been announced today the United Motorcoaches and private hire to be closed at end of RATP financial year in December
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Sept 17, 2018 20:12:31 GMT
Surely buses with faults like this shouldn't be in service? They seem to have cheekily stuck it on the school bus for this reason, like they did with VH45119 the other day. Having said that its on the 142 now, so that could prove a problem! Well it’s a pg9 from the DVSA as they are emergency exits and shouldn’t be in service tut tut
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Sept 17, 2018 8:53:38 GMT
Even if Sovereign kept the route, it would not be keeping its SLEs, they were doomed to go for this contract, due to the fact they are now 13(ish) years old. Whether Sovereign or Metroline it would have used non-unique vehicles. This isn't the first time its been operated by Metroline either, having been operated by them for a period in the 90s along with the 114 using Ms. Yes, I remember Metroline winning back route 292 for the 1993-98 term. It used Metrobuses then uniquely refurbished and given blue 1991 LBL moquette. I think Metroline ran route 114 until 1991 then lost it to BTS, later London Sovereign, until 2016. I am optimistic that, for fear of having insufficient buses for route 79 - ie if forthcoming ADHs are late - the SLEs are safe until at least November. M444 was the test bed refurb done for the 292 refurb programme back in in 1992, it was done by Hants and Dorset Trim who were mid program of refurbishing the Commercial Services 4 speed Metros at the time, the refurb included seats in the Crushed Strawberry moquette of the time which had become the standard, the walls were covered in dark grey trim which from memory didn’t wear well and they gained yellow hand rails.
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Sept 15, 2018 11:18:17 GMT
I rode a W13 and W16 in July. There may have been a delay to the W16, or the closure of the Chingford line that day may have had an impact, but there were more people in the shorter E200-MMC on route W16 than the longer one on route W13. The W16 is often very busy regardless of what the Chingford line is doing. Ironic really when you consider LT originally proposed the entire withdrawal of the Leytonstone - Chingford Mount section of the old 235 when they restructured Waltham Forest's buses in the late 1980s. The W16 has progressively gained bigger buses since ceasing to be the 235 many moons ago it provides some very quick useful and unique links across the borough
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Sept 12, 2018 18:54:18 GMT
Though no existing BT vehicles are yet reblinded for the H12, they could at least still use the front destination display. Blinds will already have Stanmore Station (from the 142) and South Harrow (from the 258), plus some intermediate turning points (e.g. Harrow Weald or Pinner) That's a very good point. So H12 has almost all the destinations on the blinds. Wish someone from BT see this posts 😀 The automatic blinds don’t work individually you select a route number and destination together not separately so displaying only a destination can only happen if they are so programmed most are not. Certainly the LU buses are not able to display just a destination as you select which destination by the controller on the bus they are packaged up by route and destination
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Aug 22, 2018 8:31:44 GMT
Perhaps sending those vehicles north was a bit premature?
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Aug 18, 2018 18:09:48 GMT
Not before time they’ve sailed close to wind for years
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Apr 30, 2018 11:09:51 GMT
OK, I will not be mentioning this matter further as I have asked the Traffic Commissioner to advise me how the rights of the passengers travelling on the said 7 buses will be affected ... if the issue does in fact lie with the operator as it seems and not the DVLA. You appear to take what the DVLA website says is gospel, the sad fact is that the DVLA are at best slow and at worst completely incompetent, they recently managed to issue nearly 15,000 driving licenses with corrupt finish dates on them and had to re-issue the whole lot. Likewise there is usually delays in the updating of both their and the Traffic Commissioner websites as well. I hope you like egg!
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Aug 20, 2017 7:10:01 GMT
VA 40381 was only refurbed a year ago. Perhaps an engine failure. Wasn't 40387 a trainer (ex VA87)? Was DPS 30710 in a smash or just engine failure?? VA40381 (VA81) was actually refurbished for private hire back in 2011 (credit to Lee) flic.kr/p/aL5QEF VA40381 involved in canopy accident at Hotel in Heathrow area severe upper deck damage as I understand it
|
|
|
Post by Towielad on Apr 9, 2017 18:36:15 GMT
I wouldn't call RATP a mess. Neither would I. I'd say there just not having a good year this year, with multiple route losses and now this Nor last year either or the year before, more and more tendering losses is driving up overhead costs, RATP just can't get near the Metroline, LG OR Abellio price on tenders. they have failed to win anything major 18 aside but have lost over 100 Buses worth of work in 2 years and failed to win anything off Abellio
|
|