|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 26, 2024 18:12:16 GMT
132 to Shooter’s Hill road sun-in-the-sands Are the blue go-ahead buses supposed to be driven by women only? I have seen it twice and coincidentally both times I am quite sure was driven by a guy …. No, they are part of a campaign to encourage more women to join Go-Ahead at all grades and were driven by women at and after the launch event. However they are equal-opportunity buses and can be driven by all genders! I identify as male and I would be happy to drive one.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 26, 2024 17:26:00 GMT
Stagecoach Oxford has operated its first battery-electric ADL Enviro400 EV in service - this may also be the first time the type has operated in passenger service in the UK. 80004 operated eight trips on Kidlington routes 2 and 2A on Friday 19th April. It has since operated on Blackbird Leys route 1 on Wednesday 24th April. It is also reported that 80001 has been registered as SK24 XRB and its previous registration of SK73 CZE has been voided. ===================== Photo of 80004 (not mine) in service on 19th April: www.oxford-chiltern-bus-page.co.uk/Pictures%20for%20298/D%20Beynon/SCO%2080004%20r%202A%20MSW%20190424%20D%20Beynon.jpg
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 26, 2024 17:13:28 GMT
<snip> Wrightbus BEV Streetdeck Electroliner H40/20D for Transport UK London Bus route 306 at QB - contract starts on 13th April but some have already entered service on routes 133 and C3. These vehicles feature the redesigned Vision Zero front end. 3048 - LV24 EUF - IN SERVICE 28/03/24 3049 - LV24 EUH 3050 - LV24 EUJ - IN SERVICE 29/03/24 3051 - LV24 EUK 3052 - LV24 EUL 3053 - LV24 EUM - IN SERVICE 29/03/24 3054 - LV24 EUN - IN SERVICE 29/03/24 3055 - LV24 EUO - IN SERVICE 29/03/24 3056 - LV24 EUP 3057 - LV24 EUR 3058 - LV24 EUT Information courtesy of Bus News Flash - 29-03-24 (LondonsTransport Google group) A follow-on vehicle has been registered LV24 EUU, but this has been numbered 3103 rather than 3059 as might have been expected. Apparently it is s single top-up vehicle and has been purchased for route 111 at TF (Twickenham) which recently had a +1 PVR increase. Registrations for 3059-3085 for route 133. Registrations for 3086-3100 and 3102 (nominally for route 381) are still awaited (3101 is LV24 EUU as reported). 3059 - LV24 EVR 3060 - LV24 EVT 3061 - LV24 EVU 3062 - LV24 EVW 3063 - LV24 EVX 3064 - LV24 EWA 3065 - LV24 EWB 3066 - LV24 EWC 3067 - LV24 EWD 3068 - LV24 EWE 3069 - LV24 EWF 3070 - LV24 EWG 3071 - LV24 EWH 3072 - LV24 EWJ 3073 - LV24 EWK 3074 - LV24 EWL 3075 - LV24 EWM 3076 - LV24 EWN 3077 - LV24 EWO 3078 - LV24 EWP 3079 - LV24 EWR 3080 - LV24 EWS 3081 - LV24 EWT 3082 - LV24 EWU 3083 - LV24 EWW 3084 - LV24 EWX 3085 - LV24 EWY
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 26, 2024 15:56:46 GMT
The SNP is is further trouble. Following the collapse of the Bute House Agreement, which saw the Scottish Greens sharing power with the SNP in the Scottish Parliament, The SNP Leader Humza Yousaf is facing calls to resign. He faces a vote of No Confidence from the Scottish Labour Party, Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Greens, and Scottish Parliamentary elections in the near future are looking increasingly likely. Good, hopefully the end of the SNP comes swiftly. I don't think the SNP will disappear completely, although they are unlikely to wield any power for some time, possibly another generation. Scottish independence will always have a small core of hardcore supporters. However there is also a significant cohort in Scotland who favour more devolution and more control over Scottish affairs, without necessarily wanting full independence, and there are Scots who would be keen to protect the devolution measures already in place and would not want powers handed back to Westminster. The Scottish Parliament is elected with a degree of proportional representation, so the SNP's best way forward is to work with other parties and seek to protect and enhance devolution, as a minority partner in a Scottish Government. How far they can do this depends on how much residual support they can hold on to, and how far Scottish Labour (or for that matter the Scottish Conservatives who are faring far better than the UK party at present) are prepared to take them seriously and work with them.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 26, 2024 12:36:37 GMT
The SNP is is further trouble. Following the collapse of the Bute House Agreement, which saw the Scottish Greens sharing power with the SNP in the Scottish Parliament, The SNP Leader Humza Yousaf is facing calls to resign. He faces a vote of No Confidence from the Scottish Labour Party, Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Greens, and Scottish Parliamentary elections in the near future are looking increasingly likely.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 26, 2024 8:30:04 GMT
It's now official - Labour is to bring National Rail back into public control if it wins the next General Election. This was announced yesterday (Thursday 25th April) at a launch event in Central London, which was part of Labour's local election campaigning. Labour is to set out its roadmap (sic!) to achieving public ownership of the railways within five years, and will introduce a Railways Act which will establish Great British Railways. The proposals have received widespread support, including from the Trade Unions (Labour has promised 'vastly improved' industrial relations), industry experts and - most notably - from Keith Williams, who chaired the recent Government review of Britain's railways. He said: “I welcome Labour’s intention, if they are elected, to take forward the substance of my recommendations to deliver a better railway for passengers and freight by creating a rail body with an integrated profit and loss account, at arm’s length from government. Running a better railway and driving revenue and reducing costs will deliver economic growth, jobs and housing by delivering better connectivity.” Public ownership of Britain's railways is also favoured by the majority of the population, according to a recent survey - over two-thirds (69%) support it, as opposed to just 9% who are opposed (21% don't know). Rail freight would remain in the private sector under the new proposals, but the Transport Secretary would set targets to increase freight use which would place a statutory duty on Great British Railways. Labour would also support open-access passenger operations where these are 'successful'. Otherwise, existing private passenger rail contracts would be taken over by Great British Railways but only as they expire, so the taxpayer would not pay compensation costs. At present, there are no contracts which extend beyond 2027. labourlist.org/2024/04/labour-party-policy-railways-trains-public-ownership-louise-haigh/
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 24, 2024 18:15:02 GMT
I think there is merit in sending the 349 on to Clapton. I would go one further and extend it to Hackney Central, and divert the 253 at Lower Clapton to run to Homerton Hospital direct via Urswick Road. I suppose the main issue would be driver changeovers for the 253, at present they take place at CT which makes them far easier to manage. I thought it was also a problem of bus type - I think LTs failed a route test around Homerton Hospital, meaning that Clapton garage would either need to introduce a new bus type that is shorter, or move the 253 to another bus garage. You could be right - I can see LTs having problems around Homerton Hospital. TfL and its predecessors have always seemed reluctant to provide that 'round-the-corner' link at Stamford Hill.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 24, 2024 18:08:39 GMT
The 279 ran to Smithfield until 1st February 1992, being part-replaced by the extension of route 153 beyond Angel. From this date half the service terminated at Manor House and half the service continued to/from Holloway, Nags Head. The Holloway journeys were cut back to Manor House from 16th October 2004, the 259 received a substantial frequency increase from the same date. Was the introduction of the 254 a part of why the 279 was fully cut from Holloway, or were the 2 events unrelated? I would by no means want to have the corridor between Seven Sisters and Manor House with the solo 259, which is why I suggested extending the 149, which could save some money whilst also providing a bit more capacity North of Edmonton Green (whilst I know money isn't too much of an issue on TfL's end now, it could help move the budget to more useful bus routes than the 349). Any of the 149 / 259 / 279 could take a slight frequency increase, if things were to get too busy, and if reliability is a concern, the 149 could be cut to Liverpool Street, which whilst it would require a change to continue to London Bridge for most journeys, most links are not broken through the 388 to London Bridge Bus Station and the 35 and 47 just outside it. On another point, the 279 would benefit a lot from an extension to Finsbury Park as greg had said, with the Manor House terminus not allowing easy interchange to other buses such as the 29, due to the approximately 200 metre walk to the nearest 29 bus stop, and the large U-turn required to turn the 279 around, with Manor House also not providing nearly enough onward connections as Finsbury Park. Though I have a question that I'm unsure of how others would react to - would the A10 corridor benefit from a parallel bus route along Watermead Way, once the Meridian Water development has been completed - say, from Edmonton Green, up the North Circular, through part of the Meridian Water development, down Watermead Way, through Tottenham Hale and onward to Seven Sisters and beyond? I think it might work if appropriate bus priority measures are installed along Watermead Way (especially Southbound), and could benefit from being a much higher-speed bus service through faster roads (avoiding a lot of 20mph speed limits). No the 254 was unrelated and took place in May 2003. In effect the 253 was already operated as two overlapping sections (Euston-Hackney and Holloway-Aldgate) and the introduction of the 254 merely formalised that arrangement. I'm not convinced extending the 279 to Finsbury Park would be worthwhile. Finsbury Park is congested and such an extension would be time-consuming, and when journeys operated to Holloway they were generally under-used beyond Manor House. The 259 provides an alternative for most journeys.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 24, 2024 17:58:33 GMT
The 279 ran to Smithfield until 1st February 1992, being part-replaced by the extension of route 153 beyond Angel. From this date half the service terminated at Manor House and half the service continued to/from Holloway, Nags Head. The Holloway journeys were cut back to Manor House from 16th October 2004, the 259 received a substantial frequency increase from the same date. Thanks for the knowledge! Not that it is completely needed, but I wonder whether if an extension of the 279 to Finsbury Park may be one that is popular? Could help out the 259, and I think be really busy when Thameslink is acting up. Another idea I had is the 349 to Clapton Pond via Upper Clapton Road. The link from Clapton and Lower Clapton to areas such as Edmonton and Seven Sisters is one that’s extremely popular especially with school kids and is not connected by one direct bus already. Stamford Hill is just one big changeover area, and a small extension may just do the job. Keeps the roads a little safer with so many schoolkids around, and If I recall a few months prior two schoolchildren were hit by a swerving 76 bus at the main junction in Stamford Hill crossing the road? I think there is merit in sending the 349 on to Clapton. I would go one further and extend it to Hackney Central, and divert the 253 at Lower Clapton to run to Homerton Hospital direct via Urswick Road. I suppose the main issue would be driver changeovers for the 253, at present they take place at CT which makes them far easier to manage.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 24, 2024 17:09:44 GMT
Due to zoning, Manor House is a massive railhead and bus routes from there during the peak hours can be rammed. Leave the 279 alone. If I recall the 279 use to run up to Holloway quite earlier in the past and was then cut to Manor House? Or Finsbury Park before Manor House? Is there a specific reason why it cuts short- while the stand is a bit awkward with the U turn and works just fine - the 254 on LTs does it often. Only issue is the only time a route can curtail to Manor House is if its the 254/279 coming from the North/East. I don’t think Ive ever seen a 253/259 curtailment to Manor House and not the 29/141/341 either. Would there not be merit in extending the 279 3 stops further on a road with not much congestion (bus lane) to Finsbury Park Station?? There is a stand on Isledon Road aswell. The 279 ran to Smithfield until 1st February 1992, being part-replaced by the extension of route 153 beyond Angel. From this date half the service terminated at Manor House and half the service continued to/from Holloway, Nags Head. The Holloway journeys were cut back to Manor House from 16th October 2004, the 259 received a substantial frequency increase from the same date.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 23, 2024 17:35:03 GMT
As a local to the 1 and 88, might I add that the 1 has not been anywhere near the best of successes. The new 1 has very good links however it is crazy long, and its crazy nature means it is often delayed or bunching. And although not their fault, the 1 has not ran its intended route, not even a single day since it began as Hampstead Heath to Canada Water. This is because of the roadworks at Mornington Crescent, and quite oftenly the protests at Southampton Row/Aldwych. The random roadworks that close access for buses to get to Euston Bus Station so the 1 diverts between Holborn and Camden via TCR and Warren Street and the 91 loops Warren Street The closure of Canada Water Bus Station Extensive roadworks at Chalk Farm Road Im sure there are probably some other issues south of the route around Bermondsey and Rotherhithe. So merging routes definitely doesnt work for all, but in some instances it isn’t the worst of ideas. A trunk route fantasy idea I had (cannot because of low bridge at Finsbury Park) would be a merger of the 4/W3 between Blackfriars and Northumberland Park, with the 236 replacing the 4’s route to Archway. The W3 is also much more frequent than the 4. The W3 works well as it is, especially at the Finsbury Park end where it acts as a feeder for an area which doesn't have good rail links, and acts as a useful east-west route across Haringey.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 23, 2024 16:53:19 GMT
Narrow roads where? The section that needs the three routes is mainly High Street North and High Street South. Good luck trying to remove buses in this busy part of east London! High St North is extremely narrow, not helped by the fact that you have other vehicles coming out of roads bordering that. So is the 147’s section through Little Ilford, though I wouldn’t remove that because that gets very busy going towards Ilford. I wonder if it would be better to send everything via Ron Leighton Way in both directions because that road is wider. That would mean passengers having to cross two directions of traffic to get to northbound buses, not ideal for the less able.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 23, 2024 13:13:12 GMT
Some snippets: - Slightly out of area, but Stagecoach South West is taking over the Taunton Park & Ride service from 12th February after First (Buses of Somerset) announced it was pulling out of the contract. Stagecoach SW will operate three double-deckers at 20-minute intervals and these will be based at its Tiverton outstation, some 20 miles from Taunton. <snip> Photo (not mine) of former Torbay Scania/Enviro400 MMC 15327 in Taunton Park & Ride livery, but drafted in to work the Exeter Chiefs rugby shuttle service C (Exeter St Davids Station - Sandy Park Stadium) on Saturday 20th April: flic.kr/p/2pLPzyJ
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 23, 2024 8:01:29 GMT
The rollout of Oxford City's all-electric fleet has reached the half-way stage, with 52 of the 104 vehciles now in service. This includes the entire BrookesBus and City Sightseeing fleets, and the five single-deck Wright Kite Electroliners. The entry into service of the 60 Wright Streetdeck Electroliners with the redesigned front for Oxford City routes is now underway, so far all those that have entered service have retained their '73' registrations. Photo (not mine) of 740 operating route 300 on 8th April: flic.kr/p/2pHLH56www.route-one.net/news/oxford-bus-group-reaches-halfway-in-electric-bus-roll-out/
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 23, 2024 7:26:51 GMT
The DLR is running shorter 2-car trains on the Woolwich branch, to reduce the mileage operated by the B92 trains which are now 30 years old. The issue is that the trains are reaching the stage at which the mileage operated means that they would have to be taken out of service for a heavy overhaul. This is expensive, and not worth doing when the trains only have a few months life left before they are replaced by the new rolling stock. Unfortunately this has been delayed by a few months. Reducing the Woolwich trains to two cars means that stock can be rotated round and the mileage spread across the B92 fleet until they can be replaced. The Woolwich branch was chosen as it is less busy than the Lewisham branch, due partly to the Elizabeth Line opening. Running three-car trains less frequently was also considered, but running two-car trains more frequently reduces the waiting time at stations. When the new trains are all in service, overall capacity on the DLR will be increased by around one-third. www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/tfl-running-shorter-dlr-trains-to-keep-the-fleet-running-71790/
|
|