|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 10, 2020 1:37:36 GMT
Battersea isn't bursting at the seams and it's quite possible that Abellio could win one or both routes, if indeed they continue in their current form. I thought you weren't making assumptions about the routes according to your post at the top of the page? I'll, make a notradamus prediction now then Abellio will not win the 148/507/521 book it!! I believe TFL are in discussion with GA over Possible reductions on the 521 & I'll make another too, GA may win the 148 too.Theyve ,got plenty of space at Q too. Hey, we'll know very soon before Christmas could it be today or tomorrow?😄😄😄 |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 10, 2020 11:42:48 GMT
If the Red Arrow routes were lost I wouldn't be surprised to see the 1 & 188 move in there to fill the gap. Remember the 11s used to run from there not too long ago. It's a very well located site - it would be counterproductive to lose it. Would be interesting to know then what would become of the electric infrastructure there for the 507/521's SEes. One 'remotely' possible senario¹ could be to divert the Metrodeckers due for Merton's 200 to Waterloo for a mixed Electric/hybrid operation of a route² with the 200 then remaining hybrid operated, as was the original intention. ¹ - eg. At TfL's request ² - incidentally the 1 has the same pvr as the 200 and could 'ideally' fully convert |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 10, 2020 11:56:17 GMT
Walworth is full hence the 415 rumoured to be moving to QB to make room for the 63 but QB loses a number of routes and operates night routes as well which increase the space they have to utilise it. I'm not saying they will either the 507 or 521 (I think Go-Ahead will retain these) but it's certainly possible for at least one to end up there. I speculate that should they win the 507 and/or 521 that it/they will go to WL to standardise electrics there on that round. QB would then get another cascaded route like the 196. |
|
|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 10, 2020 14:02:10 GMT
If the Red Arrow routes were lost I wouldn't be surprised to see the 1 & 188 move in there to fill the gap. Remember the 11s used to run from there not too long ago. It's a very well located site - it would be counterproductive to lose it. Would be interesting to know then what would become of the electric infrastructure there for the 507/521's SEes. One 'remotely' possible senario¹ could be to divert the Metrodeckers due for Merton's 200 to Waterloo for a mixed Electric/hybrid operation of a route² with the 200 then remaining hybrid operated, as was the original intention. ¹ - eg. At TfL's request ² - incidentally the 1 has the same pvr as the 200 and could 'ideally' fully convert Go ahead, own the site so they can't be forced to sell it. Walworth,is not as big as you think either. If they were to win them the 3/196/P13 will have to all move out to make space. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 10, 2020 14:26:31 GMT
If the Red Arrow routes were lost I wouldn't be surprised to see the 1 & 188 move in there to fill the gap. Remember the 11s used to run from there not too long ago. It's a very well located site - it would be counterproductive to lose it. Would be interesting to know then what would become of the electric infrastructure there for the 507/521's SEes. One 'remotely' possible senario¹ could be to divert the Metrodeckers due for Merton's 200 to Waterloo for a mixed Electric/hybrid operation of a route² with the 200 then remaining hybrid operated, as was the original intention. ¹ - eg. At TfL's request ² - incidentally the 1 has the same pvr as the 200 and could 'ideally' fully convert However the issue there would be that the MetroDeckers have a different Siemens designed charging system so are likely to be incompatible with the BYD system at RA, what could happen is however the 69s Ee's diverted to RA instead and the MetroDeckers shunted onto the 69 instead. However the issue there is all this would ideally need to be sorted out before any infrastructure installation commences. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 10, 2020 17:06:44 GMT
Walworth,is not as big as you think either. If they were to win them the 3/196/P13 will have to all move out to make space. If that's what they'd have to do they'd likely do so as it would create more work at all three South London depots. |
|
|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 10, 2020 17:09:56 GMT
Walworth,is not as big as you think either. If they were to win them the 3/196/P13 will have to all move out to make space. If that's what they'd have to do they'd likely do so, in your example creating more work at all three South London depots. They'll have to win them first, because if they do those 12m buses will need alot of space & the design of Walworth is very Awkward Indeed to say the least. All will be revealed very soon. |
|
|
|
Post by adl on Dec 10, 2020 19:57:16 GMT
Would be interesting to know then what would become of the electric infrastructure there for the 507/521's SEes. One 'remotely' possible senario¹ could be to divert the Metrodeckers due for Merton's 200 to Waterloo for a mixed Electric/hybrid operation of a route² with the 200 then remaining hybrid operated, as was the original intention. ¹ - eg. At TfL's request ² - incidentally the 1 has the same pvr as the 200 and could 'ideally' fully convert However the issue there would be that the MetroDeckers have a different Siemens designed charging system so are likely to be incompatible with the BYD system at RA, what could happen is however the 69s Ee's diverted to RA instead and the MetroDeckers shunted onto the 69 instead. However the issue there is all this would ideally need to be sorted out before any infrastructure installation commences. Have heard that the infrastructure works at SI are due to begin shortly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2020 20:02:06 GMT
Battersea is not bursting at the seams, They have lost the 452 which I don't think got replaced and the C3 just left, the 414 and 49 are going soon as well. There'll be more than enough space for the Red Arrow routes there, however it's a case of whether they win it. I think it should be a safe Go Ahead retain but we never know. Notable last time the 507 had two bidders while the 521 just had one, so Abellio are probably going to be on the prowl for at least one of the two. Battersea, according to planning docs has a capacity for 195 buses. 175 outside & 20 inside the workshops.currently,it has 211 buses plus the 49/414 expire after the RA routes which start in August. Before, you ask Walworth is bursting at the seams too. So, I can't see them winning either route or the 148 either as they've no space their either. Theyll, have space when the 49 & 414 are gone though.. And another thing to think about is, GA hold the aces with a compliant site & buses so why woul TFL award the RA routes to Abellio? Well a) because Abellio could offer a cheaper bid and b) space isn’t a problem. Look at the bids bids for the 71 & 281. One of those bidders was probably Abellio. I didn’t think they would have space at TF but clearly there was a plan to move routes around to make room. It would be foolhardy of GAL to assume the 507/521 are safe. |
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Dec 10, 2020 20:15:51 GMT
I would think if the 507/521 were to go to a new operator the vehicles and the premises would also change hands. The premises would not change hands. Remember Waterloo garage is also used as the sign on point for the 1 & 188 as well as a facility for drivers on those routes to take their reliefs. If the Red Arrow routes were lost I wouldn't be surprised to see the 1 & 188 move in there to fill the gap. Remember the 11s used to run from there not too long ago. It's a very well located site - it would be counterproductive to lose it. Go Ahead use remote logging on at several sites now. No weekend workings are allowed. I don't believe double deckers would be accepted by locals now. The maintenance area can't take double deckers. My thoughts were that TfL could specify that the routes have to run from there with the site changing hands at a price set by an independent valuer. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2020 20:30:31 GMT
The premises would not change hands. Remember Waterloo garage is also used as the sign on point for the 1 & 188 as well as a facility for drivers on those routes to take their reliefs. If the Red Arrow routes were lost I wouldn't be surprised to see the 1 & 188 move in there to fill the gap. Remember the 11s used to run from there not too long ago. It's a very well located site - it would be counterproductive to lose it. Go Ahead use remote logging on at several sites now. No weekend workings are allowed. I don't believe double deckers would be accepted by locals now. The maintenance area can't take double deckers. My thoughts were that TfL could specify that the routes have to run from there with the site changing hands at a price set by an independent valuer. There used to be a Saturday service from Waterloo back in the day - and that was with noisy Routemasters. Sunday services could be operated from other garages. It's not an insurmountable issue. It is a privately owned site - it's not for TFL to decide who gets the site. There's not really much in the way of maintenance facilities anyway - just the shed at the back for two buses. Maintenance can be done at Camberwell - or the shed rebuilt. The bus wash would also have to be changed. I don't really see what it is to the locals whether the bus is a double decker or a single. The 11 used to run from there with old noisy buses - technology has moved on and buses are much quieter now than they were then. |
|
|
|
Post by bertrell on Dec 10, 2020 21:54:41 GMT
Go Ahead use remote logging on at several sites now. No weekend workings are allowed. I don't believe double deckers would be accepted by locals now. The maintenance area can't take double deckers. My thoughts were that TfL could specify that the routes have to run from there with the site changing hands at a price set by an independent valuer. There used to be a Saturday service from Waterloo back in the day - and that was with noisy Routemasters. Sunday services could be operated from other garages. It's not an insurmountable issue. It is a privately owned site - it's not for TFL to decide who gets the site. There's not really much in the way of maintenance facilities anyway - just the shed at the back for two buses. Maintenance can be done at Camberwell - or the shed rebuilt. The bus wash would also have to be changed. I don't really see what it is to the locals whether the bus is a double decker or a single. The 11 used to run from there with old noisy buses - technology has moved on and buses are much quieter now than they were then. Note,their is a deal between TFL/Lambeth and the residents not to run DDs from there. That's, why the 11 only ran on M-F only. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 10, 2020 22:32:56 GMT
There used to be a Saturday service from Waterloo back in the day - and that was with noisy Routemasters. Sunday services could be operated from other garages. It's not an insurmountable issue. It is a privately owned site - it's not for TFL to decide who gets the site. There's not really much in the way of maintenance facilities anyway - just the shed at the back for two buses. Maintenance can be done at Camberwell - or the shed rebuilt. The bus wash would also have to be changed. I don't really see what it is to the locals whether the bus is a double decker or a single. The 11 used to run from there with old noisy buses - technology has moved on and buses are much quieter now than they were then. Note,their is a deal between TFL/Lambeth and the residents not to run DDs from there. That's, why the 11 only ran on M-F only. You're missing the point. What I'm trying to get at is that the Red Arrow routes are not attached to Waterloo Garage. It is a privately owned site and the garage would not transfer to the new operator in the event that the routes are lost. 1. You'd be giving your competitor an advantage 2. You'd be losing a very well located garage All these issues to do with deals are not insurmountable. The current arrangements are based on the current operations - I'm sure this can be renegotiated. There did used to be a Saturday service from Waterloo many years ago - and the site did used to operate double deck vehicles. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 10, 2020 22:41:18 GMT
Note,their is a deal between TFL/Lambeth and the residents not to run DDs from there. That's, why the 11 only ran on M-F only. You're missing the point. What I'm trying to get at is that the Red Arrow routes are not attached to Waterloo Garage. It is a privately owned site and the garage would not transfer to the new operator in the event that the routes are lost. 1. You'd be giving your competitor an advantage 2. You'd be losing a very well located garage All these issues to do with deals are not insurmountable. The current arrangements are based on the current operations - I'm sure this can be renegotiated. There did used to be a Saturday service from Waterloo many years ago - and the site did used to operate double deck vehicles. I'm sure in the worst case Go Ahead would rather sell RA to a developer rather than let a competitor get a hold of it. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Dec 10, 2020 23:24:21 GMT
Battersea, according to planning docs has a capacity for 195 buses. 175 outside & 20 inside the workshops.currently,it has 211 buses plus the 49/414 expire after the RA routes which start in August. Before, you ask Walworth is bursting at the seams too. So, I can't see them winning either route or the 148 either as they've no space their either. Theyll, have space when the 49 & 414 are gone though.. And another thing to think about is, GA hold the aces with a compliant site & buses so why woul TFL award the RA routes to Abellio? Well a) because Abellio could offer a cheaper bid and b) space isn’t a problem. Look at the bids bids for the 71 & 281. One of those bidders was probably Abellio. I didn’t think they would have space at TF but clearly there was a plan to move routes around to make room. It would be foolhardy of GAL to assume the 507/521 are safe. While WL may be full after the 63 gain, QB has a lot of space available - following recent losses including the 49, 211, 414, 452, C2 and C3, offset only by the 24/27. QB would definitely have space for the 507/521, is well located for the 507, and probably doable for the 521 too (SWR from Queenstown Road to Waterloo for changeovers?). Or if Abellio were to win the 507/521, another option could be to install chargers at QB, but instead move the C10/P5 to QB to use these, then use the existing chargers at WL for the 507/521. It may also be possible to negotiate contract start dates if needed, e.g. for the 49 to coincide with the 507/521 if won. Or even a temporary allocation of a route at BC. However I don't think QB is close to being full currently anyway. Though the total PVR at QB currently is perhaps close to the capacity on planning permission, this is offset by having 5 night routes at QB. |
|
