|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 24, 2017 13:53:51 GMT
The most famous case in recent years was the 324 whose presence near Stanmore was going to cause the world to end and Stanmore to disappear to the centre of the earth (I exaggerate only slightly) if you believed the detractors. How appropriate that this should come up on Christmas Eve   (now there's an in-joke...) I tend to agree with sid here - each case needs to be taken on its merits. "Judging on merit" is perfectly fine if both sides are being rational. If one side is "demented" and won't operate on facts then you stand no chance. I have zero issue with fact based opposition to proposals. Bring it on if you can demonstrably prove your concerns. Trying to deal with emotion or nonsense is like trying to nail a jelly to the wall - not possible. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Dec 24, 2017 14:16:28 GMT
How appropriate that this should come up on Christmas Eve (now there's an in-joke...) I tend to agree with sid here - each case needs to be taken on its merits. "Judging on merit" is perfectly fine if both sides are being rational. If one side is "demented" and won't operate on facts then you stand no chance. I have zero issue with fact based opposition to proposals. Bring it on if you can demonstrably prove your concerns. Trying to deal with emotion or nonsense is like trying to nail a jelly to the wall - not possible. Trouble is neither side will admit to being "demented" and probably don't even realise themselves that they are being so. Always better to look at both sides of any argument and take a dispassionate view. I'm afraid some people on here are too fixated with buses, perhaps not surprising as this is a bus forum, but to most people buses are just part of the overall picture. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 24, 2017 15:30:57 GMT
How appropriate that this should come up on Christmas Eve (now there's an in-joke...) I tend to agree with sid here - each case needs to be taken on its merits. "Judging on merit" is perfectly fine if both sides are being rational. If one side is "demented" and won't operate on facts then you stand no chance. I have zero issue with fact based opposition to proposals. Bring it on if you can demonstrably prove your concerns. Trying to deal with emotion or nonsense is like trying to nail a jelly to the wall - not possible. Exactly - for example, if they can argue reasonably that a road is too narrow to get a bus route down, I & others would be perfectly happy to accept that it’s not possible but the trouble is, a lot of resident groups come out with unreasonable arguments instead. The road I live is unsuitable for anything over a minibus (dustcarts just about fit down it) due to being narrow as well as having parked cars all down one side and I wouldn’t even argue for a bus service down that (not that we need one anyway) so I’m baffled by your fixated comment sid? |
|
|
|
Post by Alexis on Dec 24, 2017 19:21:21 GMT
The 276's routing takes it under 3 low bridges: one at Manor Road, a second on Fairfield Road, and the third on Wick Lane. The 488 also goes past the second two mentioned above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2017 0:01:51 GMT
I’m going to use my own thread to unreservedly wish everybody a merry Christmas and happy new year!!! All the best for 2018 people, much love
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Dec 25, 2017 1:58:08 GMT
Does the H17 have any restrictions for double decker?
|
|
|
|
Post by RandomBusesGirl on Dec 25, 2017 18:28:09 GMT
Apologies for any duplicates if any.
Another one that I remember: 327 goes underneath a low bridge near Turkey Street Station.
358 - low bridge by Shortlands station, if it hasn't yet been mentioned,
377 - low bridge and narrow roads
380 - roads unsuitable for deckers, such as narrow lanes, steep hills and low-hanging branches in places
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2017 19:27:33 GMT
Apologies for any duplicates if any. Another one that I remember: 327 goes underneath a low bridge near Turkey Street Station. 358 - low bridge by Shortlands station, if it hasn't yet been mentioned, 377 - low bridge and narrow roads 380 - roads unsuitable for deckers, such as narrow lanes, steep hills and low-hanging branches in places Turkey Street mentioned on Xmas day lol 358 has been mentioned and is on the updated list. Any specifics on 377 and 380? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2017 21:42:37 GMT
There are no problems with deckers on Charlton Church Lane. The 486 diversions via Woolwich are when Charlton Athletic are playing at home and the road is closed for 30 minutes before and after the game.
The 380 started as a midibus route but is now mainly run with Enviro 200 MMCs. If a short double decker was available it should be possible to run on the route.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 25, 2017 21:59:00 GMT
Turkey Street mentioned on Xmas day lol 358 has been mentioned and is on the updated list. Any specifics on 377 and 380? There are tight, narrow lanes around the Charlton Village area (mostly Charlton Lane, Charlton Church Lane [486s sometimes struggle to get down there], Morris Walk Estate, Samuel Street) and Thamesmead West area. The hilly parts are also in Charlton and Blackheath. This is a general comment prompted by the examples you used. Let's be honest here - if a single deck of 10m or greater can get round a route and there are no height restrictions then a standard length double decker should fit too. The old short 9.9m wheelbase Tridents certainly would. What might look "impossible" or "difficult" to a non bus driver is probably no issue at all for a trained bus driver. It strikes me that the routes that can't be double decked are only those where road widths are sub standard and warrant narrow buses, where some turns are sufficiently difficult with existing parking / road layouts that less than 10m long single deckers are needed and where there are genuine height restrictions such a dense overhanging trees, bridges, overhanging structures impingeing the road corridor. The guesswork over "sort of narrow roads or possibly tight turns" may be misleading. I could speculate that the W11 couldn't take double deckers but I rather suspect a good bus driver with a standard decker would be able to get it round with relative ease. The main issue is that there is not the demand to warrant a double deck every 12 mins. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 25, 2017 23:02:40 GMT
The 380 started as a midibus route but is now mainly run with Enviro 200 MMCs. If a short double decker was available it should be possible to run on the route. The shortest double decker you could have is a 9.9m Trident (though seeing as the 380 is a recent contract award, most likely nothing older than a 10.2m Enviro 400 could be used) but even then, a double decker is wider than a single decker so could cause problems on the narrow parts of the 380. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2017 23:13:06 GMT
There are tight, narrow lanes around the Charlton Village area (mostly Charlton Lane, Charlton Church Lane [486s sometimes struggle to get down there], Morris Walk Estate, Samuel Street) and Thamesmead West area. The hilly parts are also in Charlton and Blackheath. This is a general comment prompted by the examples you used. Let's be honest here - if a single deck of 10m or greater can get round a route and there are no height restrictions then a standard length double decker should fit too. The old short 9.9m wheelbase Tridents certainly would. What might look "impossible" or "difficult" to a non bus driver is probably no issue at all for a trained bus driver. It strikes me that the routes that can't be double decked are only those where road widths are sub standard and warrant narrow buses, where some turns are sufficiently difficult with existing parking / road layouts that less than 10m long single deckers are needed and where there are genuine height restrictions such a dense overhanging trees, bridges, overhanging structures impingeing the road corridor. The guesswork over "sort of narrow roads or possibly tight turns" may be misleading. I could speculate that the W11 couldn't take double deckers but I rather suspect a good bus driver with a standard decker would be able to get it round with relative ease. The main issue is that there is not the demand to warrant a double deck every 12 mins. This is why I’m asking for specific locations so I look for myself on maps to see if it looks reasonable for SDs only. Not always easy if you’re not seeing in the flesh however if there are disputes, then I will be happy once the list is complete to go to the relevant spots to look properly. I agree that the general rule should be that provided that there are no actual obstructions from a safety point of view such as you mentioned then a full size SD route should mean DD possible. The list is for theoretical and not practical running of DDs. I’m getting the sense from some postings that the difference is being missed. The theory of a DD route means that I cannot include the following in my consideration for SD routes: - trees (unless they pose a hazard, ie thick branches, protruding stumps) - residents’/stakeholder objections - turns that are tight but still reasonably manoeuvrable (I gave 111 in nurserylands and 297 in Perivale as examples) - Narrow roads that are nonetheless manoeuvrable due to sufficient passing places (which can include bus cages) - necessity for DDs on a given route - Garage space/design |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2017 23:21:47 GMT
Just to add to my previous posting a ‘tight turn’ should be a turn that a DD cannot reasonably make safely, it is not unsafe for a DD to use the full roadspace to make a turn as drivers are trained to be able to do so and we see many examples of it today. I’ll accept that a DD having to use a pavement or reverse to make a turn constitutes an unsafe tight turn.
A narrow road, IMO, should be one where buses are severely restricted for passing side by side, for example if a bus cannot pass another sitting in a bus cage. On roads where there are parked cars preventing buses passing side by side and a bus requires to pull into a side road turnout, I accept this as an SD only example.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2017 23:58:37 GMT
Just updated the list with prefix routes and will be scanning your entries soon. Sorry if there are numbers that appear that run with DDs already and/or I’ve missed SD only routes, a lot of these are well outside my area. Hope everyone has enjoyed their crimbo
|
|
|
|
Post by LX09FBJ on Dec 26, 2017 0:33:47 GMT
Not sure if mentioned but here are some more:
325 has a low hanging advert/sign en route, not sure if it has been removed or not.
357 has a low bridge at Whipps Cross Hospital, but this is only on Sunday's as the route is extended into the hospital grounds on this day only, the W15 and W19 also have the same bridge at Whipps Cross Hospital.
464 has some narrow roads between New Addington and Biggin Hill
C11 has a low bridge at Gospel Oak
H20 has a narrow stand area and some narrow roads around Whitton
The R9 hasn't got any physical restrictions to stop DD operation, and they regularly appear on the route. The R68 also doesn't have any restrictions as far as I know and before 2000, there have been double decker workings.
Feel free to correct any errors mentioned
|
|
(now there's an in-joke...)
