|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 4, 2022 16:57:15 GMT
Any particular reason why AE24 seems to be the only bus operating the 327 at the moment instead of its allocated vehicle (SL98)? SL98 always seems to have issues, so I’d hazard a guess it’s with maintenance again. It is a demo bus do is gonna have quite a few faults here and there.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jun 29, 2022 17:07:02 GMT
108 Go Ahead - Modern Wharf (It’s a silly made up name whilst we’re on the subject. It’s North Greenwich) Go Ahead - New Cross Go Ahead - Silvertown Go Ahead - Henley Road Stagecoach - Plumstead Stagecoach - Bow Stagecoach - West Ham Stagecoach - Leyton Tower Transit - Lea Interchange Could also add Catford TL into this for the Lewisham end. KB as a push (if you took the 284 out.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 14, 2021 14:35:52 GMT
Why would a new company be set up when SV do just fine as it is? To upgrade certain routes. You don’t need a new company to upgrade routes?? Routes on the Island are as adequate as possibly be and if they did I’m sure Southern Vectis can do what is necessary without any new company being set up.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 14, 2021 14:34:29 GMT
Why would a new company be set up when SV do just fine as it is? To upgrade certain routes. You don’t need a new company to upgrade routes?? Routes on the Island are as adequate as possibly be and if they did I’m sure Southern Vectis can do what is necessary without any new company being set up.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 12, 2021 19:21:17 GMT
Perhaps a new company (Vectis Bus) could take over routes 5, 7, 9 and 12. Route 5 would be converted to single-deck operation, using Enviro 200 Darts. Route 7 would use Enviro 400s, as it currently does, some HW62s as well as a few SN62s from MG in London. Route 9 via Fairlee would keep its Route 9 branding. It would use some HJ16s and some HF67s.
Route 9 via Staplers would be renumbered to Route 10. It would use HF58s, HF59s and some ex-University of Greenwich and ex-Stagecoach LX09s/LX59s. Route 12 would use some HJ16s, as well as some SN14s from PD, and some HF58s. Liveries to be posted soon!
Why would a new company be set up when SV do just fine as it is?
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 11, 2021 14:46:35 GMT
Being pedantic, the 284 batch is 10.5m so even smaller difference and as you say, both routes mix regularly as they did under Metrobus when they both had Omnitowns & then when the 284 gained 13 reg Enviro 200’s and 181 continued with Omnitowns 10.4/5m ones are the 181s batch the 10.9m being the 284s (Was listed on a board in TL when I had a tour with a friend aha), either way yh the 181/284 have never struggled to share its batches between each from the days of MB sharing the Scania Esteems to some E200s from the 284 or even 126 ending up on the 181 or vice versa. Did the MMCs get some sorta call back a few years ago however due to suspension? I remember seeing somewhere here or on FB some MMCs had to have their suspensions readjusted. Though actually thinking about it things coulda changed from then so just ignore me on that 🤣
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 11, 2021 14:44:04 GMT
Bit odd as the 284 batch are about 0.5m longer than the batch allocated to the 181. (181s are 10.4m and the 284s are 10.9m) Also abit odd as the batches are usually mixed up with each other on some days as I see daily being quite local to both routes. I’d assume it could be an old notice from when they started out after taking over from Metrobus Being pedantic, the 284 batch is 10.5m so even smaller difference and as you say, both routes mix regularly as they did under Metrobus when they both had Omnitowns & then when the 284 gained 13 reg Enviro 200’s and 181 continued with Omnitowns 10.4/5m ones are the 181s batch the 10.9m being the 284s (Was listed on a board in TL when I had a tour with a friend aha), either way yh the 181/284 have never struggled to share its batches between each from the days of MB sharing the Scania Esteems to some E200s from the 284 or even 126 ending up on the 181 or vice versa. Did the MMCs get some sorta call back a few years ago however due to suspension? I remember seeing somewhere here or on FB some MMCs had to have their suspensions readjusted.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jul 7, 2021 15:50:19 GMT
Noticed on the 181 batch of vehicles there a notice inside the cab with - “Under No circumstances must this bus be driving on the 284 route - Due to risk of grounding (No Risk Assessment) Bit odd as the 284 batch are about 0.5m longer than the batch allocated to the 181. (181s are 10.4m and the 284s are 10.9m) Also abit odd as the batches are usually mixed up with each other on some days as I see daily being quite local to both routes. I’d assume it could be an old notice from when they started out after taking over from Metrobus
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jun 29, 2021 9:01:01 GMT
You do know Thomas Lane is the stand area right for the 160/320/336??? The stop is adequately served by routes that start there. The stand is called Catford Bridge Station. The first stop on routes 160, 320 and 336 going from Catford Bridge is Thomas' Lane (Q). The stand is on Thomas Lane and are known as Thomas Lane stands. They do not stand anywhere near the station.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jun 26, 2021 17:23:56 GMT
You do know Thomas Lane is the stand area right for the 160/320/336??? The stop is adequately served by routes that start there.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on Jun 25, 2021 12:47:13 GMT
9507 is now apparently at Go Coach Hire Sevenoaks. Seen on their FB page next to one of their PVLs
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on May 26, 2021 13:02:42 GMT
The 129 is already earmarked for other things as part of the 180 restructuring, and I think a double decker is likely to be a bit much for this. I could however see a case for a diversion of the 225 up St Johns Vale and along Loampit Hill to make a connection between the two Lewisham College sites. The 129, as above, was converted to DD a few years ago. I still think there would be potential in extending it from Lewisham to East Dulwich via Lewisham Way. The 225 rerouting is also a good idea. Personally the better idea for the 225 is the extension to Bellingham that was talked about a few years ago and reposted by myself about a month or two ago.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on May 13, 2021 18:33:52 GMT
Yes but the thing is this idea just wont work. A single deck route should never replace a double deck route especially when both are rammed. I think there is potential for a 227 extension but not in this way. So what do you suggest? In my honest thoughts, swapping the routing of the 227 with the 358 could possibly be done? I’m sure it would be justifiable to do since the majority of people from Bromley Town Hall / Market Square are the ones who use the route into area’s such Anerley etc Then again I personally think the 227 as it is works perfectly and possibly the reason why it’s not been touched.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on May 11, 2021 9:13:25 GMT
In regards to the 320 I don’t see any reason why the Catford to Bromley Section should be cut when what we need is a route to support both the 208 and 320. As someone who is local and has used the route many of time to shop in bromley, get to college in the common and to get to a friend in biggin hill for gatherings (before rona) The Catford section has proved quite useful and has helped the 208 a lot. The route itself is starting to get heavy loads and could do with a route that also supports it especially during the peak where it can be impossible to get on with all the school loads and college loads. It’s a nice thought just not realistic 🤣 As has been pointed out, the idea is to replace the 320 with the 199. It’s been a long time since I regularly drove the 208 and obviously travel patterns may have changed but I think there’s more benefit to the 199 providing the support to the 208 rather than the 320 I saw however my point being is rather than withdrawing the 320 on that section, you might as well keep it and have addition of the extended 199 to help support the two. As I said before after regular use of both routes they do get quite packed between Catford and Bromley common so even replacing one with the other isn’t going to help. Also a lot of people I know who live around the biggin hill and keston area prefer the direct link into Catford rather than changing so there is a positive in why the 320 goes to Bromley.
|
|
|
Post by elcesteem16 on May 11, 2021 7:51:59 GMT
This is how I would improve Bromley’s connections. I would extend the 199 from Bellingham to Bromley North, giving Bromley new daytime links with Greenwich, Deptford, Surrey Quays & Canada Water. Then cut the Bromley to Catford section of the 320, as the 199 & 208 would be enough between the two I very much agree with the 199 supporting the 208 along Bromley Road rather than the 320. I always felt that if the split service 208 had to be replaced then a route should have been extended TO Bromley rather than FROM Bromley However, this proposal, valid as it is, sees the need for two services to terminate in Bromley. The obvious place is Bromley North but regardless of any facts and figures, Bromley North is full. There is (apparently) a stand down at Simpsons Road at Bromley South so that’s a possibility but there could be a wholesale raft of changes to services in Bromley that could possibly benefit the travelling public Firstly, perhaps current Bromley North services could be extended just that little bit further to meet or current stands. I’m thinking maybe the 138 could use the Plaistow Green stand and maybe the 354 could be pushed down to the old Widmore Green stand or even Chislehurst Caves? I did think that maybe the Ringers Road stand could be freed up by extending the 126 back down to Beckenham Junction. If you coupled this with the 161 being extended to the Ringers Road stand and the R7 being extended from Chislehurst to Eltham over the 162 then you could withdraw the 162 I definitely think there’s scope for improving bus services in the borough of Bromley as a whole and certainly within the town itself In regards to the 320 I don’t see any reason why the Catford to Bromley Section should be cut when what we need is a route to support both the 208 and 320. As someone who is local and has used the route many of time to shop in bromley, get to college in the common and to get to a friend in biggin hill for gatherings (before rona) The Catford section has proved quite useful and has helped the 208 a lot. The route itself is starting to get heavy loads and could do with a route that also supports it especially during the peak where it can be impossible to get on with all the school loads and college loads. It’s a nice thought just not realistic 🤣
|
|