|
Post by DT 11 on Sept 19, 2020 22:22:07 GMT
This Erith resident isn't too happy with Arriva. 😛 - streetcare.tfl.gov.uk/report/2250771 Oh, it's only the first day 😛! Let Arriva have a break, they might be new drivers to the HT's - the writer of this clearly has no clue about a "first day", it happens with every job, including bus companies! If it’s related to Erith though what does it have to do with HTs when there are none at DT? The vehicles described in complaint are probably Enviro2muchrattleHundreds. Most are going in January anyways.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Sept 20, 2020 8:04:41 GMT
I never thought about this before however the allocations of the HTs doesn't make sense imo. The 405s contract started first so therefore it should really be allocated HT1-11 especially as they are 20reg and it's contracted started before September 1st and the 202 should get 70reg HT12-28. It makes sense to me. The 202 was a win whereas the 405 was a retain. With deliveries delayed it made sense to prioritise the 202 as the 405 could continue with existing vehicles.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Sept 20, 2020 8:14:45 GMT
I never thought about this before however the allocations of the HTs doesn't make sense imo. The 405s contract started first so therefore it should really be allocated HT1-11 especially as they are 20reg and it's contracted started before September 1st and the 202 should get 70reg HT12-28. It makes sense to me. The 202 was a win whereas the 405 was a retain. With deliveries delayed it made sense to prioritise the 202 as the 405 could continue with existing vehicles. The 405 was a win as well. It makes sense as there were spare deckers to start the 405 and the 202's HTs thankfully were delivered on time.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Sept 20, 2020 8:17:07 GMT
It makes sense to me. The 202 was a win whereas the 405 was a retain. With deliveries delayed it made sense to prioritise the 202 as the 405 could continue with existing vehicles. The 405 was a win as well. It makes sense as there were spare deckers to start the 405 and the 202's HTs thankfully were delivered on time. It was a win - my mistake.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Sept 20, 2020 11:45:59 GMT
I never thought about This before however the allocations of the HTs doesn't make sense imo. For the following reasons The 405s contract started first so therefore it should really be allocated HT1-11 especially as they are 20reg and the 202 should get 70reg HT12-28. That’s what I thought too but the 405 did have spare DW’s to cover while the HT’s were being delivered, whilst the 202 has to use hybrids due to the Catford Green Bus Zone, so it was more of a priority to send the first HT’s to the 202 instead of the 405. Adding to that the loaned DWs are better suited for TC where they can mix a bit with the depot's own batch, plus no need for additional type training.
|
|
|
Post by Londontransport3 on Sept 20, 2020 11:53:50 GMT
Norwood HTs Blind Set 2 2X N2 157 202 249 417 468 690 N137
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Sept 20, 2020 13:18:27 GMT
Norwood HTs Blind Set 2 2X N2 157 202 249 417 468 690 N137 How come's HV's have 450 yet HT's don't?
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Sept 20, 2020 13:30:47 GMT
Norwood HTs Blind Set 2 2X N2 157 202 249 417 468 690 N137 I was hoping that HTs would be diverted to route 2 with route 202 gaining modern HVs instead.
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Sept 20, 2020 14:07:06 GMT
Since I’ve viewed one of GLB’s video of 202 today, did 202 change bus stands at Crystal Palace because of the deadrun? The 202 stood at it's regular stand today alongside the 122 & 363 from pictures I've seen. The dead run isn't a problem despite the right only turn from the stand - 202's dead run could run via the Parade, College Road, Dulwich Wood Park, South Croxted Road, Park Hall Road, Robson Road and around the West Norwood one way system - some 417's would run dead via this routing. Whilst Park Hall Road does have a restriction involving buses with more than 8 seats, it only applies to buses in service. There have been instances of dead runs via Park Hall Road and Robson Road to my memory but it's very rare, more common for diversions from 3 (prior to LT conversion) and 322. Though 417s dead running via 432 is easier into N, or up Knights Hill and 417's line of route to Crystal Palace. I'd be surprised if an out of service 202 does use Park Hall Road.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 20, 2020 14:21:59 GMT
The 202 stood at it's regular stand today alongside the 122 & 363 from pictures I've seen. The dead run isn't a problem despite the right only turn from the stand - 202's dead run could run via the Parade, College Road, Dulwich Wood Park, South Croxted Road, Park Hall Road, Robson Road and around the West Norwood one way system - some 417's would run dead via this routing. Whilst Park Hall Road does have a restriction involving buses with more than 8 seats, it only applies to buses in service. There have been instances of dead runs via Park Hall Road and Robson Road to my memory but it's very rare, more common for diversions from 3 (prior to LT conversion) and 322. Though 417s dead running via 432 is easier into N, or up Knights Hill and 417's line of route to Crystal Palace. I'd be surprised if an out of service 202 does use Park Hall Road. I did mention that 417’s have dead run this way on a number of occasions presumably wanting to avoid running around the Palace one way system at busy times and avoiding car filled Gipsy Road which is cleared for deckers. The easier route is via Central Hill & Elder Road but if a 202 driver wishes to use facilities at Palace, he may use the stand which means you can’t head towards Central Hill as it’s right turn only from the stand
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Sept 20, 2020 15:14:48 GMT
Since I’ve viewed one of GLB’s video of 202 today, did 202 change bus stands at Crystal Palace because of the deadrun? The 202 stood at it's regular stand today alongside the 122 & 363 from pictures I've seen. The dead run isn't a problem despite the right only turn from the stand - 202's dead run could run via the Parade, College Road, Dulwich Wood Park, South Croxted Road, Park Hall Road, Robson Road and around the West Norwood one way system - some 417's would run dead via this routing. Whilst Park Hall Road does have a restriction involving buses with more than 8 seats, it only applies to buses in service. Actually, looking on Streetview, the signs on Park Hall Road are the standard "no buses" signs, so I reckon the restriction should apply to all buses, not just in-service ones. Indeed I thought the restriction was originally brought in because residents complained about dead-running buses, but that might be wrong.
Ironically one of the Streetview images shows a TfL diversion board directing 322s down the restricted part of road! Presumably dispensation was given.
|
|
|
Post by LJ17THF on Sept 20, 2020 17:43:24 GMT
Norwood HTs Blind Set 2 2X N2 157 202 249 417 468 690 N137 How come's HV's have 450 yet HT's don't? TfL probably told Arriva not to blind them for the 450, I don't think the DD's are actually suitable for the route, possibly due to the length (and height, some trees may have grown since 2017/2018).
|
|
|
Post by routemasterlover on Sept 20, 2020 18:02:34 GMT
Has other N drivers been typed trained for the HTs?
|
|
|
Post by richard on Sept 20, 2020 18:21:00 GMT
Why dose HV70 have two fleet numbers at the front?
|
|
|
Post by LJ17THF on Sept 20, 2020 18:48:05 GMT
Why dose HV70 have two fleet numbers at the front? Must just be a garage error.
|
|