|
Post by elcesteem16 on Sept 17, 2023 23:08:14 GMT
And I’ve actively said to a customer I’d go downstairs to check but never ever bothered. It’s just something someone says to make the complainer feel heard. Perhaps you should complain directly to Go Ahead either on Twitter or through their website if it that’s serious an issue. They do have a contact email and phone number on their website for general enquiries. Maybe take a video and attach it for evidence. Done both but no response from GAL. Maybe have to see what the DVSA think about it. I don’t see the issue… I’ve never heard any public ever complain about this (friends/strangers). If the vibrations irritate you that much as an individual then don’t get those particular buses. GAL won’t do anything about it unless a high volume of passengers complain about it. Those heavy vibrations are pretty common in most early E200s on the SLF chassis, it’s just the buses getting on a bit. Try sitting on MB’s 732 a few rounders on the R9 as a passengers, thing used to keep my fizzy drink bubbling when on it during college lunch breaks.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Sept 17, 2023 22:58:45 GMT
With Darts, it was very common for many to vibrate excessively including the Super Pointers on the 227. Just because one Dart on the 386 had an issue doesn’t mean any bus vibrating a lot does. As I said previously, I’m guessing you’ve not used L’s, M’s & T’s among others that much as they all vibrated quite a bit The Darts on the 178 380 P4 too. 181’s ELC’s were wild vibrators! Deffo stopped me from falling asleep when going to school in the morning.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Sept 17, 2023 16:59:21 GMT
Only in one direction towards Leamouth according to schedules DS 1-9 Where's Leamouth exactly? Between Blackwall and Canning Town
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Sept 16, 2023 23:22:49 GMT
“Please can someone remind me Diesel Single Decker 10.2m & 10.8m seating layout” On the E200 / Dart SLF variants the layout between front and middle doors (not including the 2 over wheel side facing seats were: 10.2m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 2x 2p Offside 10.8m = 3x 2p (+1 side seat) nearside and 3x 2p offside On the E200 / E20D variants the layout between front and middle doors (not including the 2 over wheel side facing seats were: 10.2m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 2x 2p offside 10.8m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 3x 2p offside On the E200MMC / E20D variants (based off the 181/284 batch the layout between front and middle doors (not including the 2 over wheel seats) were: 10.5m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 3x 2p offside 10.9m = 3x 2p seats nearside (with convenient standing spot between third row and middle doors) and 3x 2p offside A yeah, as said with the new W/C space size requirement, it deducted the one row on the offside on both 10.5/10.8m in the end on the diesel MMCs, which gives them the same seating number as a 10.2m E200 Classic. (Was supposed to reply to one thing but oh well)
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Sept 16, 2023 23:16:16 GMT
Please can someone remind me Diesel Single Decker 10.2m & 10.8m seating layout
On the E200 / Dart SLF variants the layout between front and middle doors (not including the 2 over wheel side facing seats were:
10.2m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 2x 2p Offside 10.8m = 3x 2p (+1 side seat) nearside and 3x 2p offside
On the E200 / E20D variants the layout between front and middle doors (not including the 2 over wheel side facing seats were:
10.2m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 2x 2p offside 10.8m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 3x 2p offside
On the E200MMC / E20D variants (based off the 181/284 batch the layout between front and middle doors (not including the 2 over wheel seats) were:
10.5m = 3x 2p seats nearside and 3x 2p offside 10.9m = 3x 2p seats nearside (with convenient standing spot between third row and middle doors) and 3x 2p offside
A yeah, as said with the new W/C space size requirement, it deducted the one row on the offside on both 10.5/10.8m in the end on the diesel MMCs, which gives them the same seating number as a 10.2m E200 Classic.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Sept 15, 2023 8:31:06 GMT
Right so that’s what they have 😯 (can’t access the photos as not on Facebook) I can imagine it looks good, but if they’re using that moquette then it makes no sense why the W19’s buses weren’t refurbished with it. - 56’s green and yellow hybrids refurbished with regular moquette - 294’s MMC’s refurbished with grey leather - New electroliners with TfL moquette What are they playing at?😂 not to mention two separate batches of metrocities also with different interiors, but they were inherited by Stagecoach so can’t be helped I do disagree with SL413’s view of a standardised interior though. By all means make the look and exterior all the same to be recognisable, but at least let the interiors have an identity to represent the different operators. There are some lovely interiors, RATP’s grey with green S-Stock, abellios yellow and red, and even the standard interiors, it’d be a shame to see them go just to clarify, the tfl moquette which the Electroliners have, is that the one consisting of the red & grey squares which the sullivan MMCs have? Yes
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Aug 14, 2023 16:24:39 GMT
Rarely use B9TLs that much so will bow to your knowledge. Extra requirements for priority seating is that they should be a close as reasonably possible to the priority entrance (a bit wishy-washy) and must have space under the seat to accommodate a guide dog. Those seats should almost satisfy those requirements as there is space beneath those seats - the closeness to the priority entrance is really the only thing they could fudge here. Thinking about this, aren’t the seats behind the door fitted with whatever electrics/chassis gear unit so putting anything underneath won’t be too possible so if that is a regulation I do question how that would work.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Aug 14, 2023 16:16:02 GMT
I would guess with the image in my head the it would either be a layout that retains the 4 lower seats just behind the mid doorway. Though I know on the ex ELT examples I think they removed the 2 rows on the offside (from memory) to accommodate a longer luggage rack. Though you could accommodate the rule by leaving the seat in-front of the wheel-arch seat and just having a wheelchair bay sized luggage rack. Another way you could have it is similar to the layout of the mid staircase ALX’s where the nearside layout had the chairs closest to the mid doors and so then you have 4 (two behind mid door and 2 infront. Thought could be squished so may need fold ups (if allowed). Either way, there are possibilities of accommodating the rule, just have to wait and see how it goes about. All I’ve seen in this server is ADL and GAL are looking at layouts that won’t mean ripping out the second door. But why are ADL working on the vehicles? They have nothing to do with them? Are you sure the person you spoke with wasn’t referring to a different type and a plan to upgrade other vehicles for the x26s new tender? Perhaps EH from the 14? Believe they have a side of the business that does refurbs / mods on other types.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Aug 14, 2023 16:13:22 GMT
Be interesting to see how they get the legally required 4 low floor priority seats in I expect it’ll be especially difficult to manoeuvre a wheelchair as well. Rolling backwards won’t be a fun experience. This just seems totally unnecessary and a total waste of money. It depends I guess, the idea could be they put the entrance for the wheelchairs via the front to access the bay.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Aug 14, 2023 16:10:43 GMT
Someone in a server I’m in who works at ADL mentioned that they’re keeping the mid doors, but moving the wheelchair area to between the doors and then just adding the luggage racks on. Be interesting to see how they get the legally required 4 low floor priority seats in I would guess with the image in my head the it would either be a layout that retains the 4 lower seats just behind the mid doorway. Though I know on the ex ELT examples I think they removed the 2 rows on the offside (from memory) to accommodate a longer luggage rack. Though you could accommodate the rule by leaving the seat in-front of the wheel-arch seat and just having a wheelchair bay sized luggage rack. Another way you could have it is similar to the layout of the mid staircase ALX’s where the nearside layout had the chairs closest to the mid doors and so then you have 4 (two behind mid door and 2 infront. Thought could be squished so may need fold ups (if allowed). Either way, there are possibilities of accommodating the rule, just have to wait and see how it goes about. All I’ve seen in this server is ADL and GAL are looking at layouts that won’t mean ripping out the second door.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Aug 14, 2023 13:16:37 GMT
These people have time considering the contract potentially ends NEXT YEAR!!!!!! Why not just keep the buses as it is now and then possibly procure newer buses and make modifications then. It would be a terrible and shameless waste of money as they’d have to move the disabled bay, remove a set of doors and build a new ramp all for the sake of a few months. I don’t see it happening as it will cost a small fortune to do. They are better off investing that money in custom built bespoke vehicles. Someone in a server I’m in who works at ADL mentioned that they’re keeping the mid doors, but moving the wheelchair area to between the doors and then just adding the luggage racks on.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 5, 2023 12:27:58 GMT
I can certainly see Arriva wanting the 176 and 393 back, two routes they had for a long time before losing them! The very same thing can be said about the 126 286 that was at DT for years and the short stay 162. I remember when I was there some drivers were saying those routes will eventually return. I had no words to say. Those routes will never return and the same goes for the 176. Why have excessive travel time to run those routes ? Plus with the 176 the liberty to ask another operator to use their facilities for meal breaks, the previous arrangement was from 1997 I believe… At this time round it wouldn’t be worth it. 68/N68 196 I better off going for those routes. Why not the 464 out of curiosity? There should not be any need to answer this question but I will answer it anyway I doubt anything in the New Addington area would be gained except the current 466 that passes the garage. Well pretty simple the previous tender only had two bidders. Stagecoach haven’t even gone for the 464 probably since 2004. Abellio & Go Ahead London 2014 The tender before that only had 1 bidder… 2009 2004 had two bidders. Looks like the driver of HV297 was having fun and games. Arriving at Anerley as a 249, then entering an upcoming 432 trip into iBus, then leaving as a 249 .... thought initially a new batch of buses had been blinded for the 432, but the vehicle hist was suspect. HV280, HV400-412 are the only Gemini 3s with 432 on the blinds. Looks like HV297 was subbed. Surely you wouldn’t just need Q or WL for facilities. There’s a whole array of shops for food and toilet buisness including the maccies across the road.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Aug 29, 2022 17:27:28 GMT
Not surprised just checked on Google maps and the walking time between C & Beddington Lane stop for the 264 is about 20 mins. May as well travel on the tram from Therapia Lane to West Croydon where there are driver facilities available. If it was still the days of Metrobus a ferry would have probably been used with the changeovers at that stop. Similar to when the 320 had changeovers at Keston Church using Ferry vehicles. I wouldn’t be surprised if, like the S1, there are multiple changeover points depending on the duty. I think the 208 has a somewhat similar form of operating? Some changeovers (I assume mid shift/meal changeovers) are done at Bromley Town Hall and the start of shift/end of shift ones were done at Orpington. This was obviously what I observed when MB first took over an I took the Bromley end frequently to college, but could have changed now.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 8, 2022 12:06:39 GMT
The low bridge at Lower Sydenham means only single deckers at KB. Not necessarily, as buses can still go around Bell Green into Catford. Obviously you wouldn’t run say the 136 or routes that go along Bromley Road from there as the deadrun (particularly for the 136) would be pointless especially if you have TL, but the 160/660/194/450 etc could easily run from there. It’s just a small Outstation so wouldn’t be able to fit the 160/660 in
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 8, 2022 1:56:13 GMT
Are the EVs for the 160 and 660 stored at KB or TB? TL
|
|