|
Post by cl54 on Sept 14, 2024 14:47:59 GMT
Was it ever even confirmed it was getting Metrocitys. Its always been a very silent award. No but it’s the only option they have. I don’t think its allowed to abstain ordering for so long to wait for the Enviro100EV? I can't help wondering how a small narrow bodied single door ADL 100EV will work with the number of people travelling nowadays with shopping bags on wheels and walking aids.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Sept 14, 2024 14:54:09 GMT
No but it’s the only option they have. I don’t think its allowed to abstain ordering for so long to wait for the Enviro100EV? I can't help wondering how a small narrow bodied single door ADL 100EV will work with the number of people travelling nowadays with shopping bags on wheels and walking aids. I agree, in my opinion 9.7m double door buses should be the minimum standard for all routes except where absolutely not possible (such as the H2, H3, R5/10 etc). The small route swap between the 470 and S3 made as part of the Sutton/Croydon changes should actually allow the route to easily use 9.7m buses without any concern, as the roads it was diverted away from were the most difficult part of the route by far (very narrow roads with parked cars and difficult turns).
|
|
|
Post by PGAT on Sept 14, 2024 15:03:30 GMT
I can't help wondering how a small narrow bodied single door ADL 100EV will work with the number of people travelling nowadays with shopping bags on wheels and walking aids. I agree, in my opinion 9.7m double door buses should be the minimum standard for all routes except where absolutely not possible (such as the H2, H3, R5/10 etc). The small route swap between the 470 and S3 made as part of the Sutton/Croydon changes should actually allow the route to easily use 9.7m buses without any concern, as the roads it was diverted away from were the most difficult part of the route by far (very narrow roads with parked cars and difficult turns). The route still goes through plenty of backstreets where this could be problematic as well
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 14, 2024 15:29:46 GMT
I can't help wondering how a small narrow bodied single door ADL 100EV will work with the number of people travelling nowadays with shopping bags on wheels and walking aids. I agree, in my opinion 9.7m double door buses should be the minimum standard for all routes except where absolutely not possible (such as the H2, H3, R5/10 etc). The small route swap between the 470 and S3 made as part of the Sutton/Croydon changes should actually allow the route to easily use 9.7m buses without any concern, as the roads it was diverted away from were the most difficult part of the route by far (very narrow roads with parked cars and difficult turns). Have you ever taken the S3? No way you are getting anything above 9m round some of the back roads of Worcester Park North and North Cheam. The change didn’t really do anything but take some of the residents of North Sutton that little bit further from Tesco. Both should have been left as they were.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Sept 15, 2024 13:21:14 GMT
For the sake of keeping all their BYDs under 1 roof, I wonder whether the former route U5 BYDs at WL on route 381 might stay there, with Electroliners currently on route U5 at DH staying there.
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Sept 15, 2024 13:30:57 GMT
For the sake of keeping all their BYDs under 1 roof, I wonder whether the former route U5 BYDs at WL on route 381 might stay there, with Electroliners currently on route U5 at DH staying there. Would be the third time U5 has been upgraded even with its current buses fit to work the route 2017 - 2022 Enviro400Hs 2022 - 2023 Enviro400EVs Also in the same year, it got upgraded to younger (72-reg) Electroliners, originally meant for the 111 and 2024 sees it having even younger Electroliners.
|
|
|
Post by ! ALEED on Sept 15, 2024 14:13:56 GMT
For the sake of keeping all their BYDs under 1 roof, I wonder whether the former route U5 BYDs at WL on route 381 might stay there, with Electroliners currently on route U5 at DH staying there. I mean it makes sense, but then there are still Electroliners at WL for the 363, and it would make sense to keep them at WL since they were there originally anyway. Additionally the 381 has a higher PVR than the U5 so there wouldn't be enough to fully convert it resulting in some Electroliners being introduced for it anyway, meaning it's better off keeping the U5 fully BYD and the 381 fully Electroliners. Also, don't they have to use the buses that they won the route with contract wise? I mean I understand there can be some changes for reasons, but I doubt keeping buses under one roof is one personally! I think the 381 should receive its intended buses and oust the BYDs back to the U5, where they belong!
|
|
|
Post by YX18KVJ (DLE30221) on Sept 15, 2024 16:06:50 GMT
For the sake of keeping all their BYDs under 1 roof, I wonder whether the former route U5 BYDs at WL on route 381 might stay there, with Electroliners currently on route U5 at DH staying there. I mean it makes sense, but then there are still Electroliners at WL for the 363, and it would make sense to keep them at WL since they were there originally anyway. Additionally the 381 has a higher PVR than the U5 so there wouldn't be enough to fully convert it resulting in some Electroliners being introduced for it anyway, meaning it's better off keeping the U5 fully BYD and the 381 fully Electroliners. Also, don't they have to use the buses that they won the route with contract wise? I mean I understand there can be some changes for reasons, but I doubt keeping buses under one roof is one personally! I think the 381 should receive its intended buses and oust the BYDs back to the U5, where they belong! Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t BYDs initially intended for 381? Don’t forget that 363 has length restrictions which is why Electroliners were ordered. Though due to the 381 having a higher PVR than U5 the swap cannot happen. 381 will only get its intended electrics as soon as charging facilities at WL are better suited for electroliners (which is why the swap happened in the first place?) That being said I personally think what the 381 and U5 are currently using suit both routes.
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Sept 15, 2024 16:11:12 GMT
I mean it makes sense, but then there are still Electroliners at WL for the 363, and it would make sense to keep them at WL since they were there originally anyway. Additionally the 381 has a higher PVR than the U5 so there wouldn't be enough to fully convert it resulting in some Electroliners being introduced for it anyway, meaning it's better off keeping the U5 fully BYD and the 381 fully Electroliners. Also, don't they have to use the buses that they won the route with contract wise? I mean I understand there can be some changes for reasons, but I doubt keeping buses under one roof is one personally! I think the 381 should receive its intended buses and oust the BYDs back to the U5, where they belong! Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t BYDs initially intended for 381? Don’t forget that 363 has length restrictions which is why Electroliners were ordered. Though due to the 381 having a higher PVR than U5 the swap cannot happen. 381 will only get its intended electrics as soon as charging facilities at WL are better suited for electroliners (which is why the swap happened in the first place?) That being said I personally think what the 381 and U5 are currently using suit both routes. 100% agree with everything there, but I think the reason for the swap was the other way round, it's the DH chargers that aren't suited to the BYD type.
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Sept 15, 2024 16:39:24 GMT
Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t BYDs initially intended for 381? Don’t forget that 363 has length restrictions which is why Electroliners were ordered. Though due to the 381 having a higher PVR than U5 the swap cannot happen. 381 will only get its intended electrics as soon as charging facilities at WL are better suited for electroliners (which is why the swap happened in the first place?) That being said I personally think what the 381 and U5 are currently using suit both routes. 100% agree with everything there, but I think the reason for the swap was the other way round, it's the DH chargers that aren't suited to the BYD type. That was the reason touted yes 😀
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 15, 2024 18:42:17 GMT
I mean it makes sense, but then there are still Electroliners at WL for the 363, and it would make sense to keep them at WL since they were there originally anyway. Additionally the 381 has a higher PVR than the U5 so there wouldn't be enough to fully convert it resulting in some Electroliners being introduced for it anyway, meaning it's better off keeping the U5 fully BYD and the 381 fully Electroliners. Also, don't they have to use the buses that they won the route with contract wise? I mean I understand there can be some changes for reasons, but I doubt keeping buses under one roof is one personally! I think the 381 should receive its intended buses and oust the BYDs back to the U5, where they belong! Correct me if I’m wrong but weren’t BYDs initially intended for 381? Don’t forget that 363 has length restrictions which is why Electroliners were ordered. Though due to the 381 having a higher PVR than U5 the swap cannot happen. 381 will only get its intended electrics as soon as charging facilities at WL are better suited for electroliners (which is why the swap happened in the first place?) That being said I personally think what the 381 and U5 are currently using suit both routes. Yes the 133 was for Electroliners and the 381 10.9m City's and the 363/C3 10.3m City's. I'm guessing the switch of the shorter ones to Wright made sense to switch the lot over.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 15, 2024 23:49:17 GMT
Will the U7 be taking the existing Enviro 200 MMCs from the E7 or R70 or will it keep its E200 Darts as its existing single deckers?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 16, 2024 1:13:41 GMT
Will the U7 be taking the existing Enviro 200 MMCs from the E7 or R70 or will it keep its E200 Darts as its existing single deckers? It has already taken MMC's on from the E7 as it's Enviro 200's have transferred elsewhere IIRC
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Sept 17, 2024 11:09:26 GMT
1727 spotted at Hounslow Bus Station
|
|