|
Post by cl54 on Dec 7, 2020 9:59:36 GMT
There aren't any height restrictions on the 386. When I first moved back to the area in 2000 it was operated by 12 seater buses. Usage has increased considerably over the years and would justify deckers considering it only runs every 15 minutes the day.
There are lots of tight turns in the Kidbrooke area with lots of parked cars. The route serves several large schools/colleges.
The route is usually operated by short SENs with a few SEs. In recent times some of the SEs have been the slightly longer version.
Any decker would have to be short and I believe Optare are the only company offering such a vehicle.
|
|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 7, 2020 10:54:53 GMT
There aren't any height restrictions on the 386. When I first moved back to the area in 2000 it was operated by 12 seater buses. Usage has increased considerably over the years and would justify deckers considering it only runs every 15 minutes the day. There are lots of tight turns in the Kidbrooke area with lots of parked cars. The route serves several large schools/colleges. The route is usually operated by short SENs with a few SEs. In recent times some of the SEs have been the slightly longer version. Any decker would have to be short and I believe Optare are the only company offering such a vehicle. The 386 is not suitable for DDs and it will never get then ever. So, do not expect to see any Optares on that route ever.
|
|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 7, 2020 10:56:57 GMT
327: 377: 383: 393: 404: 549: I don't think there's anything stopping it from deckers but I do question whether the bridge in Buckhurst Way is low 327 - low bridge at Turkey Street. 377 - low bridge on Lincoln Road. 383 - longer vehicles cannot do the U-turn at Woodside Park Station (rail replacement DDs usually require supervision to do so). 393 (and 46) - it was mentioned recently that there is a formal restriction on DDs travelling eastbound at Kentish Town West because of the risk of bridge strikes. I believe this restriction is only lifted if there are mitigation measures in place (e.g. cones in the road to force vehicles away from the bridge wall).
404 - tight turns in several places, especially the new section of route in Old Coulsdon.
549 - the bridge on Buckhurst Way is not low. Checking on Streetview there are no warning signs, so has to be over 15'. And DDs have been that way on rail replacement work.
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Dec 7, 2020 10:59:55 GMT
327 - low bridge at Turkey Street. 377 - low bridge on Lincoln Road. 383 - longer vehicles cannot do the U-turn at Woodside Park Station (rail replacement DDs usually require supervision to do so). 393 (and 46) - it was mentioned recently that there is a formal restriction on DDs travelling eastbound at Kentish Town West because of the risk of bridge strikes. I believe this restriction is only lifted if there are mitigation measures in place (e.g. cones in the road to force vehicles away from the bridge wall).
404 - tight turns in several places, especially the new section of route in Old Coulsdon.
549 - the bridge on Buckhurst Way is not low. Checking on Streetview there are no warning signs, so has to be over 15'. And DDs have been that way on rail replacement work.
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used. It's a bit early for April fools!
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Dec 7, 2020 11:02:25 GMT
327 - low bridge at Turkey Street. 377 - low bridge on Lincoln Road. 383 - longer vehicles cannot do the U-turn at Woodside Park Station (rail replacement DDs usually require supervision to do so). 393 (and 46) - it was mentioned recently that there is a formal restriction on DDs travelling eastbound at Kentish Town West because of the risk of bridge strikes. I believe this restriction is only lifted if there are mitigation measures in place (e.g. cones in the road to force vehicles away from the bridge wall). 404 - tight turns in several places, especially the new section of route in Old Coulsdon. 549 - the bridge on Buckhurst Way is not low. Checking on Streetview there are no warning signs, so has to be over 15'. And DDs have been that way on rail replacement work.
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used. And why not? Queenstown Road railway bridge, the road below was lowered, hence the dip, when the trams were converted to DD, as are other bridges in the area.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Dec 7, 2020 11:34:36 GMT
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used. And why not? Queenstown Road railway bridge, the road below was lowered, hence the dip, when the trams were converted to DD, as are other bridges in the area. The bridge at Shortlands Station cannot be lowered because the Ravensbourne runs adjacent. In some other places sewage or water pipes run directly under the roadway. Dips under bridges can be susceptible to flooding.
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Dec 7, 2020 11:35:06 GMT
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used. And why not? Queenstown Road railway bridge, the road below was lowered, hence the dip, when the trams were converted to DD, as are other bridges in the area. I think there's a fair chance that roads would have been lowered by now if it was possible. It's not just buses that are affected.
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Dec 7, 2020 11:37:22 GMT
There aren't any height restrictions on the 386. When I first moved back to the area in 2000 it was operated by 12 seater buses. Usage has increased considerably over the years and would justify deckers considering it only runs every 15 minutes the day. There are lots of tight turns in the Kidbrooke area with lots of parked cars. The route serves several large schools/colleges. The route is usually operated by short SENs with a few SEs. In recent times some of the SEs have been the slightly longer version. Any decker would have to be short and I believe Optare are the only company offering such a vehicle. The 386 is not suitable for DDs and it will never get then ever. So, do not expect to see any Optares on that route ever. Why? Most of the route parallels double deck routes. The next contract will require electric vehicles. Length will be a problem even with the available single deckers.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 7, 2020 11:50:01 GMT
There aren't any height restrictions on the 386. When I first moved back to the area in 2000 it was operated by 12 seater buses. Usage has increased considerably over the years and would justify deckers considering it only runs every 15 minutes the day. There are lots of tight turns in the Kidbrooke area with lots of parked cars. The route serves several large schools/colleges. The route is usually operated by short SENs with a few SEs. In recent times some of the SEs have been the slightly longer version. Any decker would have to be short and I believe Optare are the only company offering such a vehicle. The 386 is not suitable for DDs and it will never get then ever. So, do not expect to see any Optares on that route ever. You've still provided no justification for all these swooping statements that you make. Even if DDs are out of the question you never know as one day an operator could quite easily order an Optare Single Decker
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 7, 2020 12:34:12 GMT
The 386 is not suitable for DDs and it will never get then ever. So, do not expect to see any Optares on that route ever. Why? Most of the route parallels double deck routes. The next contract will require electric vehicles. Length will be a problem even with the available single deckers. ADL already make a 9.7m MMC electric single decker which would make it around the route given the 386 is allocated some 9.6m SE's
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 7, 2020 12:37:12 GMT
327 - low bridge at Turkey Street. 377 - low bridge on Lincoln Road. 383 - longer vehicles cannot do the U-turn at Woodside Park Station (rail replacement DDs usually require supervision to do so). 393 (and 46) - it was mentioned recently that there is a formal restriction on DDs travelling eastbound at Kentish Town West because of the risk of bridge strikes. I believe this restriction is only lifted if there are mitigation measures in place (e.g. cones in the road to force vehicles away from the bridge wall). 404 - tight turns in several places, especially the new section of route in Old Coulsdon. 549 - the bridge on Buckhurst Way is not low. Checking on Streetview there are no warning signs, so has to be over 15'. And DDs have been that way on rail replacement work.
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used. It's not always possible to lower roads due to a number of reasons - you really think they wouldn't of lowered Thurlow Park Road on the A205 by now if it was feasible given it's one of the most struck bridges in the south east?
|
|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 7, 2020 12:39:34 GMT
The roads should be lowered so buses like the 227/46/170 and many others that need them can be used. It's not always possible to lower roads due to a number of reasons - you really think they wouldn't of lowered Thurlow Park Road on the A205 by now if it was feasible given it's one of the most struck bridges in the south east? Easy, do a Survey of the road like they did with the 37 diversion yrs ago!
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Dec 7, 2020 12:41:41 GMT
Why? Most of the route parallels double deck routes. The next contract will require electric vehicles. Length will be a problem even with the available single deckers. ADL already make a 9.7m MMC electric single decker which would make it around the route given the 386 is allocated some 9.6m SE's The E200EV is now available at a 9.2m length as well - this would probably fit around most routes that currently use 8.9m/9.0m SDs. Otherwise there is also the Solo EV and possibly an electric Streetlite. I don't think we'll see such orders for a while, the next route up for tender requiring short SDs is the 273, though this is likely to be a Stagecoach retain with existing diesel MMCs. Next would be the 439/S2, followed by the R* routes to be awarded in June. The 439/S2 will probably have lower PVRs so operators may find existing vehicles, or the S2 might be able to use longer SDs, depending on where the length restriction is on the existing S4. I think the Orpington tranche could be the first batch of single-door electric SDs for London, regardless of operator.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 7, 2020 13:30:53 GMT
ADL already make a 9.7m MMC electric single decker which would make it around the route given the 386 is allocated some 9.6m SE's The E200EV is now available at a 9.2m length as well - this would probably fit around most routes that currently use 8.9m/9.0m SDs. Otherwise there is also the Solo EV and possibly an electric Streetlite. I don't think we'll see such orders for a while, the next route up for tender requiring short SDs is the 273, though this is likely to be a Stagecoach retain with existing diesel MMCs. Next would be the 439/S2, followed by the R* routes to be awarded in June. The 439/S2 will probably have lower PVRs so operators may find existing vehicles, or the S2 might be able to use longer SDs, depending on where the length restriction is on the existing S4. I think the Orpington tranche could be the first batch of single-door electric SDs for London, regardless of operator. Where did you hear ADL make a 9.2m electric E200 ADL don’t list it on their brochure in website downloads Possibly it is so new ADL haven’t yet added it to their website www.alexander-dennis.com/media/85867/byd-adl-enviro200ev.pdf
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Dec 7, 2020 15:09:47 GMT
And why not? Queenstown Road railway bridge, the road below was lowered, hence the dip, when the trams were converted to DD, as are other bridges in the area. I think there's a fair chance that roads would have been lowered by now if it was possible. It's not just buses that are affected. My suggestion, was only based on a road I've used thousands of times. Obviously where roads have not been lowered there will be justifiable reasons i.e. sewers, u/g rivers etc. I really would like to know why our favourite bridge on the SCR, has never been considered, I wonder what's under the road there?
|
|