|
Post by snowman on Nov 21, 2020 8:45:55 GMT
How come's BU13ZVE (Mercedes Benz/Evobus Citaro K Demo now with Kent Coach Tours) had a fleetcode of MEC70 (not used) but was later changed to MBK1? I think MEC70 was temporary, when the bus was being used as as spare when it was covering for upgrade of other Citaros. So that route could remain 100% Citaro. This was before the fleet got reduced due to a fire wrecking number of buses
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 22, 2020 2:22:01 GMT
Why was the 263 transferred from First to Metroline mid contract in 2002?
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Nov 22, 2020 3:10:24 GMT
Why was the 263 transferred from First to Metroline mid contract in 2002? It wasn’t mid contract as Metroline won it on tender in 2002. I don’t remember the exact details but Leaside/Cowie won the contract in 1996 and operated from WN. Then in 2001, it got subcontracted to First from NP for the remainder of it’s contract which was about 9 months. I thought I read somewhere it was part of a exchange with Arriva but I can’t seem to find what sort of exchange it was.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 22, 2020 3:14:47 GMT
Why was the 263 transferred from First to Metroline mid contract in 2002? It wasn’t mid contract as Metroline won it on tender in 2002. I don’t remember the exact details but Leaside/Cowie won the contract in 1996 and operated from WN. Then in 2001, it got subcontracted to First from NP for the remainder of it’s contract which was about 9 months. I thought I read somewhere it was part of a exchange with Arriva but I can’t seem to find what sort of exchange it was. Thanks.
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Nov 22, 2020 9:10:18 GMT
Do you all think that Peak hour extensions and bits should come back to London like it should help out of other route in the busy times
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 22, 2020 9:34:11 GMT
Do you all think that Peak hour extensions and bits should come back to London like it should help out of other route in the busy times Definitely, loadings to and from mainline stations are heavily peaked in normal circumstances. Waterloo is over bussed off peak but often under bussed at peak times. I'm not sure the 521 is really needed off peak but on the other hand I think there is probably a case for the 171 to still go to Holborn during peak hours. Having said that whether peak hours will ever be the same post covid remains to be seen.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2020 10:06:11 GMT
Do you all think that Peak hour extensions and bits should come back to London like it should help out of other route in the busy times Definitely, loadings to and from mainline stations are heavily peaked in normal circumstances. Waterloo is over bussed off peak but often under bussed at peak times. I'm not sure the 521 is really needed off peak but on the other hand I think there is probably a case for the 171 to still go to Holborn during peak hours. Having said that whether peak hours will ever be the same post covid remains to be seen. You must be the only person I know to have missed the really positive news of the vaccine! It is hopped most people will have had the jab by late sprint/summer and social distancing will pretty much be over. Shock horror 2021 might almost return to normal and central London will open up again with office workers returning.
Sorry to disappoint but these buses will be needed.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Nov 22, 2020 10:19:09 GMT
Do you all think that Peak hour extensions and bits should come back to London like it should help out of other route in the busy times No I don't. They were got rid of for a reason - to make the network simpler to understand and use. If you want more buses at busy times - increase the frequency!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 22, 2020 11:39:43 GMT
Do you all think that Peak hour extensions and bits should come back to London like it should help out of other route in the busy times Like wirewiper, no they should remain a thing of the past. Having a simpler to understand network is a great commodity to have and limits confusion
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 22, 2020 13:36:18 GMT
Do you all think that Peak hour extensions and bits should come back to London like it should help out of other route in the busy times No I don't. They were got rid of for a reason - to make the network simpler to understand and use. If you want more buses at busy times - increase the frequency! They may have been got rid of for a reason, but that does not mean that reason is still valid today. If there is not the money to increase the frequency on a whole route, should the busier section be denied an enhanced service. A regular network might be great when awash with money, but money is probably better concentrated where it is needed when the financial belt needs tightening. Should we really be basing a network around the understanding of the lowest common denominator?
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Nov 22, 2020 14:33:11 GMT
No I don't. They were got rid of for a reason - to make the network simpler to understand and use. If you want more buses at busy times - increase the frequency! They may have been got rid of for a reason, but that does not mean that reason is still valid today. If there is not the money to increase the frequency on a whole route, should the busier section be denied an enhanced service. A regular network might be great when awash with money, but money is probably better concentrated where it is needed when the financial belt needs tightening. Should we really be basing a network around the understanding of the lowest common denominator? I am arguing for network simplicity, having a network that is easy to understand - and where there is a degree of stability and confidence that the routes will operate to the same pattern at all times, there is more confidence to use the network. London's buses also have a social remit and are not operated commercially. The simpler the network, the easier it is to use and understand for the greater number which enhances social mobility, and can also encourage a shift away from car use. I would argue that more money needs to be put into bus services, support and investment needs to be consistent and not turned on and off like a tap.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 22, 2020 14:55:41 GMT
No I don't. They were got rid of for a reason - to make the network simpler to understand and use. If you want more buses at busy times - increase the frequency! They may have been got rid of for a reason, but that does not mean that reason is still valid today. If there is not the money to increase the frequency on a whole route, should the busier section be denied an enhanced service. A regular network might be great when awash with money, but money is probably better concentrated where it is needed when the financial belt needs tightening. Should we really be basing a network around the understanding of the lowest common denominator? Exactly, inevitably there are going to be routes or sections of route that are only justified at certain times. Whilst the network should be as easy to understand as possible (and colour coding does wonders for that but I digress!) I don't accept this idea that the average passenger is too stupid to understand that a particular route only runs at peak times or doesn't operate in the evening. I've yet to encounter anybody waiting for an X68 on a Sunday or a 404 at 10pm for example.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 22, 2020 15:03:52 GMT
They may have been got rid of for a reason, but that does not mean that reason is still valid today. If there is not the money to increase the frequency on a whole route, should the busier section be denied an enhanced service. A regular network might be great when awash with money, but money is probably better concentrated where it is needed when the financial belt needs tightening. Should we really be basing a network around the understanding of the lowest common denominator? I am arguing for network simplicity, having a network that is easy to understand - and where there is a degree of stability and confidence that the routes will operate to the same pattern at all times, there is more confidence to use the network. London's buses also have a social remit and are not operated commercially. The simpler the network, the easier it is to use and understand for the greater number which enhances social mobility, and can also encourage a shift away from car use. I would argue that more money needs to be put into bus services, support and investment needs to be consistent and not turned on and off like a tap. We have short working on the underground ... seems to work there ... it really is simple to grasp. Agree, London buses are not commercial, but they still have a budget that has to be stuck to. All public bodies have budgets you have to work within, or otherwise you end up going 'bankrupt' and serving an s114, like Croydon Council had to do through sheer financial incompetency ... something you would seem to be advocating for TfL.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Nov 22, 2020 15:25:53 GMT
I am arguing for network simplicity, having a network that is easy to understand - and where there is a degree of stability and confidence that the routes will operate to the same pattern at all times, there is more confidence to use the network. London's buses also have a social remit and are not operated commercially. The simpler the network, the easier it is to use and understand for the greater number which enhances social mobility, and can also encourage a shift away from car use. I would argue that more money needs to be put into bus services, support and investment needs to be consistent and not turned on and off like a tap. We have short working on the underground ... seems to work there ... it really is simple to grasp. Agree, London buses are not commercial, but they still have a budget that has to be stuck to. All public bodies have budgets you have to work within, or otherwise you end up going 'bankrupt' and serving an s114, like Croydon Council had to do through sheer financial incompetency ... something you would seem to be advocating for TfL. I am not advocating for TfL to go into s114. However budgets can be amended to reflect changing circumstances, especially in an emergency situation which causes a catastrophic loss of revenue through circumstances that are beyond TfL's control. At the moment TfL is actually providing increased bus service through the school extras, on top of normal levels of service, because that is being mandated and paid for by the Government. I cannot comment on Croydon Council as I am not familiar with the circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Nov 22, 2020 15:50:16 GMT
They may have been got rid of for a reason, but that does not mean that reason is still valid today. If there is not the money to increase the frequency on a whole route, should the busier section be denied an enhanced service. A regular network might be great when awash with money, but money is probably better concentrated where it is needed when the financial belt needs tightening. Should we really be basing a network around the understanding of the lowest common denominator? Exactly, inevitably there are going to be routes or sections of route that are only justified at certain times. Whilst the network should be as easy to understand as possible (and colour coding does wonders for that but I digress!) I don't accept this idea that the average passenger is too stupid to understand that a particular route only runs at peak times or doesn't operate in the evening. I've yet to encounter anybody waiting for an X68 on a Sunday or a 404 at 10pm for example. I can't think of many routes that can only be justified at certain times, most of the ones which still do are low-frequency and pretty marginal anyway. The principle does not need to be applied to the bulk of the network though. The X68 may be a special case, and the exception that proves the rule because it is so well-established and known - although conversely, I bet there are still occasional travellers who don't usually travel at peak times and get caught out by the lengthy non-stop section. However I don't see why the 404 should not have an evening service. Another example is the 521 which only runs Mondays to Fridays, why can't that have a skeleton weekend service like the 507 does?
|
|