|
Post by SILENCED on Jul 22, 2022 10:44:33 GMT
With the withdrawal of 78 at the end of 2022, would it be a stretch or not plausible if they were sent down to TH for partial conversion of 250 and 64 or one route, make TH more hybridised instead of withdrawing the vehicles completely? I would convert 157 with those HAs as 19 HAs won’t fit the 64 or 250’s full allocation I would not be shocked to see all the HAs at TH with the next 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 22, 2022 12:43:46 GMT
With the withdrawal of 78 at the end of 2022, would it be a stretch or not plausible if they were sent down to TH for partial conversion of 250 and 64 or one route, make TH more hybridised instead of withdrawing the vehicles completely? I would convert 157 with those HAs as 19 HAs won’t fit the 64 or 250’s full allocation The HAs allocated to the 78 will not complete the 157 either. 20 Ts including T11, would still need 1 additional HA or any bus to complete the allocation. Baring in mind the 157s buses are parked at Norwood however it will be interesting if this practice continues for the next contract when it can be simply operate fully from TC without the need for ferrying. 64 133 157 333 417 all due very soon if retained I can see 64 133 & 333 going Electric.
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jul 22, 2022 12:44:31 GMT
Winkworth can advertise any apartments as "Close to transport links" I don't know why they don't electrify Stamford Hill and start running electrics from there, Tottenham could transfer some of their buses like 243 and 149 there, and the bulk of Wood Green's routes go to Tottenham whilst any construction work takes place. (W4 passes AR, might as well return there) As good as these plans are, I don't know why broke TfL are so pushing the green agenda when the cupboard is bare. A lot can change with people's transport habits and usage, as we've seen in 2020 [SF] already has electric equipment installed... Is SF returning to use any time soon? They are fitting electric equipment for Enfield and the 307, but there aren't any electric buses on any route near SF
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jul 22, 2022 12:56:32 GMT
I would convert 157 with those HAs as 19 HAs won’t fit the 64 or 250’s full allocation The HAs allocated to the 78 will not complete the 157 either. 20 Ts including T11, would still need 1 additional HA or any bus to complete the allocation. Baring in mind the 157s buses are parked at Norwood however it will be interesting if this practice continues for the next contract when it can be simply operate fully from TC without the need for ferrying. 64 133 157 333 417 all due very soon if retained I can see 64 133 & 333 going Electric. For what it's worth I see the 64 using ex 78 and 133 hybrids, 133, 157 & 417 electric and 333 existing. The 133 is mainly G2 HV's not compliant for a new contract with 4 HA's iirc. I could also see N getting one more route in the area with electrics.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 22, 2022 13:08:40 GMT
The HAs allocated to the 78 will not complete the 157 either. 20 Ts including T11, would still need 1 additional HA or any bus to complete the allocation. Baring in mind the 157s buses are parked at Norwood however it will be interesting if this practice continues for the next contract when it can be simply operate fully from TC without the need for ferrying. 64 133 157 333 417 all due very soon if retained I can see 64 133 & 333 going Electric. For what it's worth I see the 64 using ex 78 and 133 hybrids, 133, 157 & 417 electric and 333 existing. The 133 is mainly G2 HV's not compliant for a new contract with 4 HA's iirc. I could also see N getting one more route in the area with electrics. You have a point however the 64 stands outside of TH so a pantograph can be used if required or bus swaps at the terminus.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jul 22, 2022 13:45:04 GMT
For what it's worth I see the 64 using ex 78 and 133 hybrids, 133, 157 & 417 electric and 333 existing. The 133 is mainly G2 HV's not compliant for a new contract with 4 HA's iirc. I could also see N getting one more route in the area with electrics. You have a point however the 64 stands outside of TH so a pantograph can be used if required or bus swaps at the terminus. My view would be 133 & 333 go electric. 64 gets HAs, ex-78 & 133 ... those on 133 replaced by HV ex-AR or 242 for final few months. 417 get HVs ex AR &/or 242 157, still a lot of announcements to be made before that, so will refrain from making prediction. This is obviously presuming they are retains, and pending East London awards.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jul 22, 2022 15:06:22 GMT
I would convert 157 with those HAs as 19 HAs won’t fit the 64 or 250’s full allocation The HAs allocated to the 78 will not complete the 157 either. 20 Ts including T11, would still need 1 additional HA or any bus to complete the allocation. Baring in mind the 157s buses are parked at Norwood however it will be interesting if this practice continues for the next contract when it can be simply operate fully from TC without the need for ferrying. 64 133 157 333 417 all due very soon if retained I can see 64 133 & 333 going Electric. Judging by the contract retention in 2017, I don't see a full electric allocation. Along with the 333 if retained, I can see a mix of HAs and EAs for the 133/333 contracts.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 22, 2022 15:23:07 GMT
The HAs allocated to the 78 will not complete the 157 either. 20 Ts including T11, would still need 1 additional HA or any bus to complete the allocation. Baring in mind the 157s buses are parked at Norwood however it will be interesting if this practice continues for the next contract when it can be simply operate fully from TC without the need for ferrying. 64 133 157 333 417 all due very soon if retained I can see 64 133 & 333 going Electric. Judging by the contract retention in 2017, I don't see a full electric allocation. Along with the 333 if retained, I can see a mix of HAs and EAs for the 133/333 contracts. Just because of what happened in the past does not mean the same will happen again. BN already has Electrics. I’ll be very surprised if the opportunity is not taken to upgrade BN with existing vehicles moved to garages with much older buses especially now with what has been revealed in relation to WN.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Jul 22, 2022 15:31:56 GMT
Judging by the contract retention in 2017, I don't see a full electric allocation. Along with the 333 if retained, I can see a mix of HAs and EAs for the 133/333 contracts. Just because of what happened in the past does not mean the same will happen again. BN already has Electrics. I’ll be very surprised if the opportunity is not taken to upgrade BN with existing vehicles moved to garages with much older buses especially now with what has been revealed in relation to WN. Except the difference is Arriva London North has entire depot empty to reshuffle things into where as London South is very tight on space across most of their garages. Even with expected upcoming reductions there just won’t be anywhere suitable within their current portfolio to house that many vehicles and nowhere large enough to BN to temporarily use either. It could only really work in a staged construction utilising more of the tram shed if maintenance could be housed their temporarily but even then it still might be tight.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 22, 2022 15:39:35 GMT
Just because of what happened in the past does not mean the same will happen again. BN already has Electrics. I’ll be very surprised if the opportunity is not taken to upgrade BN with existing vehicles moved to garages with much older buses especially now with what has been revealed in relation to WN. Except the difference is Arriva London North has entire depot empty to reshuffle things into where as London South is very tight on space across most of their garages. Even with expected upcoming reductions there just won’t be anywhere suitable within their current portfolio to house that many vehicles and nowhere large enough to BN to temporarily use either. It could only really work in a staged construction utilising more of the tram shed if maintenance could be housed their temporarily but even then it still might be tight. Not really as TC have lost quite a lot of work and can fit about 135 vehicles so Arriva London South garages as a whole are not full so should not be an issue to allow works to take place at any garage. Abellio moved the 3 to QB to allow works to be done for the 63 so what is the issue...
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Jul 22, 2022 15:47:13 GMT
Except the difference is Arriva London North has entire depot empty to reshuffle things into where as London South is very tight on space across most of their garages. Even with expected upcoming reductions there just won’t be anywhere suitable within their current portfolio to house that many vehicles and nowhere large enough to BN to temporarily use either. It could only really work in a staged construction utilising more of the tram shed if maintenance could be housed their temporarily but even then it still might be tight. Not really as TC have lost quite a lot of work and can fit about 135 vehicles so Arriva London South garages as a whole are not full so should not be an issue to allow works to take place at any garage. Abellio moved the 3 to WL to allow works to be done for the 63 so what is the issue... Okay so that’s 30 odd buses rising to about 45 with the loss of the 264. If the 319s vehicles were to remain in situ, because of the chargers, that would still leave 40+ vehicles to house. Which is easier said than done.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 22, 2022 15:58:14 GMT
Not really as TC have lost quite a lot of work and can fit about 135 vehicles so Arriva London South garages as a whole are not full so should not be an issue to allow works to take place at any garage. Abellio moved the 3 to WL to allow works to be done for the 63 so what is the issue... Okay so that’s 30 odd buses rising to about 45 with the loss of the 264. If the 319s vehicles were to remain in situ, because of the chargers, that would still leave 40+ vehicles to house. Which is easier said than done. Well of course the 319 would have to remain at BN obvious that sense. BN is not full either just had mass reductions... just shows that many guess that garages are full from armchair observations... TH is full. N is not full.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Jul 22, 2022 16:29:40 GMT
Okay so that’s 30 odd buses rising to about 45 with the loss of the 264. If the 319s vehicles were to remain in situ, because of the chargers, that would still leave 40+ vehicles to house. Which is easier said than done. Well of course the 319 would have to remain at BN obvious that sense. BN is not full either just had mass reductions... just shows that many guess that garages are full from armchair observations... TH is full. N is not full. There isn’t really a need to be rude about it. If you say they aren’t full that’s fine but cut the attitude.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Jul 22, 2022 17:20:30 GMT
Well of course the 319 would have to remain at BN obvious that sense. BN is not full either just had mass reductions... just shows that many guess that garages are full from armchair observations... TH is full. N is not full. There isn’t really a need to be rude about it. If you say they aren’t full that’s fine but cut the attitude. I don’t think DT was being particularly rude. I believe he works or did work for Arriva so probably knows more than others. There is an awful lot of guessing that does go on here.
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Jul 22, 2022 17:46:23 GMT
Except the difference is Arriva London North has entire depot empty to reshuffle things into where as London South is very tight on space across most of their garages. Even with expected upcoming reductions there just won’t be anywhere suitable within their current portfolio to house that many vehicles and nowhere large enough to BN to temporarily use either. It could only really work in a staged construction utilising more of the tram shed if maintenance could be housed their temporarily but even then it still might be tight. Not really as TC have lost quite a lot of work and can fit about 135 vehicles so Arriva London South garages as a whole are not full so should not be an issue to allow works to take place at any garage. Abellio moved the 3 to QB to allow works to be done for the 63 so what is the issue... I remember reading an unconfirmed report somewhere, either here or on another group that the 50 was due to move to TC when the 264 goes. Now that the 264’s departure is a month away, is there any truth to this?
|
|