|
Post by ak121 on Jul 17, 2022 18:38:11 GMT
The situation on the E1 is almost hilarious- a short route with really only a little traffic faced during the worst of times at one extremity of the route (Greenford Broadway) is suffering from ridiculous bunching and then large gaps. A few weeks ago, there was only one bus Ealing bound tracking on LVF at 0730 in the morning on a Tuesday?! The fact that AV is a considerable distance away from the route means that subbing vehicles is noticeably difficult, Abellio also faced this distance problem with their garage for a while, but at least their 14 reg E400Hs were reliable. The fact that the vast majority of buses on the E1 are not even compliant for its contract with RATP is ridiculous with ADH's reliability being abhorrent. A clearly apparent downgrade in service provided. Garage distance is not a consideration for tfl. It’s all about the contract price and nothing else. no loyalty to an operator that may have increased patronage through good operating. The organisation is a joke and needs dismantling Yes- unfortunately, TfL's decisions are now primarily based on which operator can operate the route for cheapest. It's a shame that RATP have frequently been seen to bid over-ambitiously and resultingly, providing a level of service that is frankly ridiculous on many of its routes.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Jul 17, 2022 16:27:35 GMT
Wow, the E1 is pretty bad. It’s such a short route, I wonder why it seems to do badly. The situation on the E1 is almost hilarious- a short route with really only a little traffic faced during the worst of times at one extremity of the route (Greenford Broadway) is suffering from ridiculous bunching and then large gaps. A few weeks ago, there was only one bus Ealing bound tracking on LVF at 0730 in the morning on a Tuesday?! The fact that AV is a considerable distance away from the route means that subbing vehicles is noticeably difficult, Abellio also faced this distance problem with their garage for a while, but at least their 14 reg E400Hs were reliable. The fact that the vast majority of buses on the E1 are not even compliant for its contract with RATP is ridiculous with ADH's reliability being abhorrent. A clearly apparent downgrade in service provided.
|
|
|
Metroline
May 17, 2022 17:39:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by ak121 on May 17, 2022 17:39:34 GMT
Are the Hybrid buses on the 302 route the same, I mean in terms of the same manufacturers, basically the Gemini 3 is just the newer model of the Gemini 2? Both models are based on Volvo’s B5LH engine, it’s just that Gemini 3 Mark 1 (LK14 batch originally ordered against the 7’s contract) succeeded the standard Gemini 2 body and then the Gemini 3 Mark 2 (LK65 batch originally ordered against the 295’s contract) succeeded the Mark 1.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Apr 22, 2022 19:06:02 GMT
I wonder if some of the ADH's will go with the SP's instead of ADE's as the ADE's have no known reliability issues and are of a similar age albeit fully diesel rather than hybrids. I wonder if the VH's congregate at WK & TV for the school routes moving more ADE's around? I think tfl allowing a downgrade from hybrid to diesel is unlikely. Doesn’t the 14 +2 VHs released from the H91 fir nicely onto the H98? It's funny though- the E1 is tendered to operate with ADHs, but they're so unreliable that most of the time, the majority of buses operating the route are SPs. A certain downgrade from the previous 14-reg E400Hs from Abellio. I wonder if RATP have a plan for if the E1 is eventually extended to Osterley?
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Mar 5, 2022 7:48:04 GMT
On LVF, SEe37-40 have been listed as withdrawn and a few others in that large Red Arrow batch have either been listed as VOR or last used in Aug 2021. Withdrawing 5-6 year old electric buses seems quite questionable, so have they actually been withdrawn? What is the long term plan for this large batch following on from the cuts on the 507 and 521, I think a few are being used on the 360 and now the 444 if iirc.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Mar 4, 2022 22:07:03 GMT
Based on Abellio’s history they will likely go off lease and be sold. There is a long history of perfectly good and more importantly young single/double deckers with Abellio going off lease when they could be reused elsewhere. I heard that 195 could possibly have a split SD & DD allocation from the U5 MMCs. The route is perfectly fine for DD operation plus having the capacity increase would really benefit it as it’s always fully packed throughout Southall and Hayes. This would be really beneficial for a route that is frequently overcrowded. May I ask where you heard this from?
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Nov 29, 2021 22:50:19 GMT
The bus routes by West Dulwich Station are all operated by Abellio with each route presently housing buses at different depots: 3/N3 at QB 201 at BC P13 at WL Blackbird Cross are all Metroline but operated by 4 different garages (was 5 when ON was still open) 83/N83 at PV (was ON) 182 at HD 245 at PV 297 at PA 302 at AC N98 at AC & HD Although not a single location, a 1.5 mile section of Edgware Road between Staples Corner and Cricklewood Broadway is operated by Metroline from 6 different garages (AC, W, EW, HD, PV & WJ) However this goes down to 5 when 226 is lost. Up until 3 months ago, if you extended half a mile further up Edgware Road to West Hendon, there was a 7th Metroline garage route 83/N83 that operated from ON before it closed. Prior to the 232 loss, all routes in Neasden were operated by Metroline, so throwing in W for the 112, 232 and 332 into that mix too. Fingers crossed Metroline can nab it back when it comes for retendering.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Nov 27, 2021 23:05:00 GMT
Imperial coaches SK19EVR working an extra on the 95 Is there a reason for this, I was so confused when I saw this!
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Nov 2, 2021 20:55:23 GMT
Even though the DELs look like crap on the outside they are actually a good, fast batch of MMCs so I will sort of miss them when the route goes to London United next year. Was sort of hoping London United would loan the DELs if the BEs are late but looks like this isn't the case. The other Metroline garage which is local to me is Perivale West. Their VWHs/VMHs and VWs which are often used on the 90 are kept to a high standard both inside and out. Don't think I've ever seen a single dirty VMH or VWH from them yet. Prior to them gaining the VMHs I used to see the SELs in quite a poor state. Most of the time I used to see the rear blind stuck on route 7! I believe the blinds were manual on the SELs (the front ones certainly were and I’m fairly certain the back ones were too) so it was probably they worked find but the driver couldn’t be asked/forgot to go to the rear blind and change it. Unpopular opinion here: the SELs (except LTs obviously) were the worst batch of buses London has ever seen. I absolutely despised them. Although I didn't really like Metroline's SELs, I couldn't help but smile whenever I would get one on the 90 and the bus would shake so violently as it zoomed over the potholes and uneven road surface on Kingshill Avenue. The fact that the seats were rock hard made my whole spine shake lol. Nowadays, the VMHs handle the roads much better.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Nov 1, 2021 21:52:43 GMT
Just travelled on VWH2243 on the 134 is this the only one with USB charging points? This is the first time I have seen a VWH with them I think this was one of 10 LK66 reg VWHs that were retrofitted with USB ports at HD for the X140.
|
|
|
Metroline
Oct 28, 2021 21:26:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by ak121 on Oct 28, 2021 21:26:42 GMT
The Van Hools are indeed 12m long however all possible routes were tested many months ago. The 112 can't operate with them due to the bus station at North Finchley and hydrogen under pressure doesn't exactly end well. There aren't any other routes they could be used on which does make them a slight waste. Would route 95 present any issues? Or even, though further from PV, the 190? The 95 has a few tight spots in Northern Southall, these are made especially worse when the bus meets a 95 or 105 in the opposite direction too. I’m not 100%, but 12m could just about squeeze through.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Oct 13, 2021 21:09:35 GMT
I hadn’t realised one had gone into a bus stop pole. Could it be insufficient type training? Nope, not a training issue. LT's have suffered from unintended acceleration since their introduction. Lots of investigations have taken place at multiple operators over the years and I don't think anyone has come up with a definitive reason why LT's are prone to this kind of event. It most probably is this. Slightly eerie that all of AV’s LT incidents have been concentrated at Southall Town Hall….
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Oct 13, 2021 18:37:00 GMT
LT88 becomes the fourth LT at AV to get into a crash. It smashed into the back of a Metroline DE which then went into the back of on the 482s E400MMCs on Cambridge road. I’m not sure if it is a problem with AV’s drivers or the buses but this is the third crash involving RATP’s LTs in Southall. The first one was a minor one where the bus driver swung into a bus stop pole, the second was when bus drivers got into an ‘argument’ and one crashed into another LT and today this? I’m just worried that people may get hurt. The 95, 482 and H32 with SPs and even ADHs were/are fine so I’m wondering what’s different about the LTs (apart from their slightly longer length?)
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Oct 7, 2021 20:23:00 GMT
Are the LEDs on ML’s WHDs slightly different, they seem to perfectly match the font on traditional blinds? This is most obvious when they’re on the 245: the number exactly replicates the traditional blind, i.e. the numbers being slightly thinner and personally more pleasing to the eye. Think those look worse than the variation used by RATP at the moment, it wastes excessive space on the LED. As I said, it’s personally more pleasing to the eye when they replicate they look of the traditional blind more.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Oct 7, 2021 20:13:11 GMT
These LED's are horrible. They aren't horrible in my opinion. I had problems with the LED style at first but they do look standard. In fact they look almost the same as the normal white blinds we all grew a custom to. The only slight downside is that "290" is slightly too large for the space it was provided with. It's similar with the BCEs on the 65. Btw, 2 deckers are now on the 290. A VH and a BCE. RATP really are more open to throw in whatever they have on the route than Abellio. Are the LEDs on ML’s WHDs slightly different, they seem to perfectly match the font on traditional blinds? This is most obvious when they’re on the 245: the number exactly replicates the traditional blind, i.e. the numbers being slightly thinner and personally more pleasing to the eye.
|
|