|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 11, 2024 13:06:44 GMT
It is being pulled on a lorry being driven on the right looking at a video. Hard to make that claim when the video cuts off before it gets to the front of the lorry and it is impossible to tell given how jerky it is and how poorly it is shot. If there is a longer video than the 7 second clip let me know. There's one in the comments of a Londoner post, now you do mention it the video was taken from the right hand side of a car travelling on the right hand side so there's no way to tell if there's oncoming traffic. However the buildings in the background are not British and the music being played in the car is Chinese.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 11, 2024 13:10:39 GMT
Hard to make that claim when the video cuts off before it gets to the front of the lorry and it is impossible to tell given how jerky it is and how poorly it is shot. If there is a longer video than the 7 second clip let me know. There's one in the comments of a Londoner post, now you do mention it the video was taken from the right hand side of a car travelling on the right hand side so there's no way to tell if there's oncoming traffic. However the buildings in the background are not British and the music being played in the car is Chinese. Yes, the lorry is also clearly Chinese. The only telltale sign is the lack of steering wheel on front of the videographer but it even in Hong Kong LHD vehicles care becoming more common gas they are cheaper than RHD imports. But it is very clearly somewhere in China as I wrote a while back. There is also no way of telling how old this video is as it seems to be on a Chinese social media app.
|
|
|
Post by PGAT on Sept 11, 2024 13:39:01 GMT
My bet is that something is incoming for the SL7, soon to be revealed! How can something be ordered for the SL7 before the tender result comes out?
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 11, 2024 13:53:04 GMT
The 151 has been using the demo for quite a while so its possible I guess but I'd still be more inclined to think they will ultimately need to find a chosen bus for routes that can't take 10.9m ones and the E400EV is more likely to be that. Yes GAL seem to have given Wright a very wide berth since the last batch of WSDs came in, it was reported they were having issues with Wright like several operators, and that’s obviously been enough to deter them from ever going back since. I do winder if we might see the odd batch of Kites* from GAL though, seems a wild suggestion but the method in my madness is that they’ll need to order some single deckers in the interim, between now where the BYD/ADL E200 isn’t available anymore, and when the new ADL E200EV comes in, as it doesn’t look like BYD are doing an integral single decker. - *unless they go for a BZL as a stop-gap vehicle I could only see them going for something else for a specific route if they needed them quite quickly but for the 233, 355, 360, 444, B16 especially as they are likely to need the E100EV for some of the B routes it would probably make more sense to wait.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Sept 11, 2024 14:15:09 GMT
My bet is that something is incoming for the SL7, soon to be revealed! The BD11 could be a plausible option if Go Ahead retain the route but as mentioned we don't yet know who the winning operator is. I'm guessing this BD11 will be trialled out like with EL1 and MVB1
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Sept 11, 2024 14:35:18 GMT
The 151 has been using the demo for quite a while so its possible I guess but I'd still be more inclined to think they will ultimately need to find a chosen bus for routes that can't take 10.9m ones and the E400EV is more likely to be that. Yes GAL seem to have given Wright a very wide berth since the last batch of WSDs came in, it was reported they were having issues with Wright like several operators, and that’s obviously been enough to deter them from ever going back since. Arriva despite their own Streetdeck issues still ordered more Wright products, ie their ES class Electroliners. With Go Ahead keeping some WSs for the P4 gain this makes me wonder for the 44's 18 reg WSDs on whether they stay or go¹ if the route's retained with existing buses, baring in mind plenty older hybrids are available ¹ - preferred and perhaps more likely option
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Sept 11, 2024 16:11:52 GMT
Yes GAL seem to have given Wright a very wide berth since the last batch of WSDs came in, it was reported they were having issues with Wright like several operators, and that’s obviously been enough to deter them from ever going back since. Arriva despite their own Streetdeck issues still ordered more Wright products, ie their ES class Electroliners. With Go Ahead keeping some WSs for the P4 gain this makes me wonder for the 44's 18 reg WSDs on whether they stay or go¹ if the route's retained with existing buses, baring in mind plenty older hybrids are available ¹ - preferred and perhaps more likely option The difference in this case though is that GAL will have ample hybrids to choose from should the 44 be retained with hybrids. The P4 only had those hateful 39 WS’s available for its contract, except the 65-reg SEs which will be forced to the 170 due to the very low bridge
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Sept 11, 2024 16:44:46 GMT
Arriva despite their own Streetdeck issues still ordered more Wright products, ie their ES class Electroliners. With Go Ahead keeping some WSs for the P4 gain this makes me wonder for the 44's 18 reg WSDs on whether they stay or go¹ if the route's retained with existing buses, baring in mind plenty older hybrids are available ¹ - preferred and perhaps more likely option The difference in this case though is that GAL will have ample hybrids to choose from should the 44 be retained with hybrids. The P4 only had those hateful 39 WS’s available for its contract, except the 65-reg SEs which will be forced to the 170 due to the very low bridge Maybe the 170 could be diverted? Running via Gwynne Road and Battersea High Street means it runs under a bridge that has a 16 foot limit which would allow taller buses or even deckers on the route.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 11, 2024 16:53:06 GMT
The difference in this case though is that GAL will have ample hybrids to choose from should the 44 be retained with hybrids. The P4 only had those hateful 39 WS’s available for its contract, except the 65-reg SEs which will be forced to the 170 due to the very low bridge Maybe the 170 could be diverted? Running via Gwynne Road and Battersea High Street means it runs under a bridge that has a 16 foot limit which would allow taller buses or even deckers on the route. The last time the 170 was diverted in 2018 there was a massive outcry from residents which is why the brand new WSs were replaced by the older SEs swapping with the 286.
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Sept 11, 2024 17:02:27 GMT
Maybe the 170 could be diverted? Running via Gwynne Road and Battersea High Street means it runs under a bridge that has a 16 foot limit which would allow taller buses or even deckers on the route. The last time the 170 was diverted in 2018 there was a massive outcry from residents which is why the brand new WSs were replaced by the older SEs swapping with the 286. Is it really that big of a deal? Only one stop on the Roehampton side will be missed out.
|
|
|
Post by bustavane on Sept 11, 2024 17:19:25 GMT
The last time the 170 was diverted in 2018 there was a massive outcry from residents which is why the brand new WSs were replaced by the older SEs swapping with the 286. Is it really that big of a deal? Only one stop on the Roehampton side will be missed out. Vocal, influential residents plus Wandsworth Council, I believe.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 11, 2024 17:23:18 GMT
The last time the 170 was diverted in 2018 there was a massive outcry from residents which is why the brand new WSs were replaced by the older SEs swapping with the 286. Is it really that big of a deal? Only one stop on the Roehampton side will be missed out. It was enough of a deal for residents to complain, although the route you proposed using Gwynne Road appears to be different to what TfL did. “ The 170’s route covers keys areas of SW18 which are not serviced particularly well by tube or overground rail. So vital is the service, that when part of the route was suddenly withdrawn just before Christmas 2017, over 800 residents signed a petition in just a few days to get the route reinstated. The problem arose when TfL replaced the old style single decker bus throughout the route with a newer model which couldn’t safely fit under the rail bridge on Lombard Road. The 170 completely disappeared from the Lombard Road, Vicarage Crescent, Battersea Church Road area and was diverted via Battersea Bridge Road and Prince of Wales Drive until January 2018 when TfL agreed to reinstate the old style buses. “ - from the WandsworthSW18
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Sept 11, 2024 17:36:05 GMT
This is getting tedious with you trying to pick holes in all my posts and let’s be honest it all stems back to picking you up regarding DX in the past. The original person who posted the photo did so to be the quickest but never considered as others pointed out the bus is probably still in China. The tunnel is not even finished yet people think Go Ahead want buses sat around when a set open date has not even been confirmed. The opening could slip for a number of reasons and Go Ahead would probably rather use the buses elsewhere so would be surprised if they do come delivered in Superloop livery. It’s one bus let’s wait and see if anymore are sighted. I await your picking apart of future posts of mine. Looking at the position of the lorry carrying the bus and the vehicle the picture was taken from, I would say it was taken in a country where they drive on the left. Mainland China if I recall correctly drive on the right. In my opinion that is unlikely to have been taken there. Looking at the video on FB it looks like it’s on some type of motorway so hard to tell if it’s left or right side. Regardless I think it’s certainly not in the UK.
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Sept 11, 2024 18:56:08 GMT
Is it really that big of a deal? Only one stop on the Roehampton side will be missed out. It was enough of a deal for residents to complain, although the route you proposed using Gwynne Road appears to be different to what TfL did. “ The 170’s route covers keys areas of SW18 which are not serviced particularly well by tube or overground rail. So vital is the service, that when part of the route was suddenly withdrawn just before Christmas 2017, over 800 residents signed a petition in just a few days to get the route reinstated. The problem arose when TfL replaced the old style single decker bus throughout the route with a newer model which couldn’t safely fit under the rail bridge on Lombard Road. The 170 completely disappeared from the Lombard Road, Vicarage Crescent, Battersea Church Road area and was diverted via Battersea Bridge Road and Prince of Wales Drive until January 2018 when TfL agreed to reinstate the old style buses. “ - from the WandsworthSW18 I understand however, the routing I proposed allows the 170 to still serve these areas of Battersea and also have more taller buses to run it (hopefully not Streetlites). Here's what I proposed.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Sept 11, 2024 19:00:49 GMT
It was enough of a deal for residents to complain, although the route you proposed using Gwynne Road appears to be different to what TfL did. “ The 170’s route covers keys areas of SW18 which are not serviced particularly well by tube or overground rail. So vital is the service, that when part of the route was suddenly withdrawn just before Christmas 2017, over 800 residents signed a petition in just a few days to get the route reinstated. The problem arose when TfL replaced the old style single decker bus throughout the route with a newer model which couldn’t safely fit under the rail bridge on Lombard Road. The 170 completely disappeared from the Lombard Road, Vicarage Crescent, Battersea Church Road area and was diverted via Battersea Bridge Road and Prince of Wales Drive until January 2018 when TfL agreed to reinstate the old style buses. “ - from the WandsworthSW18 I understand however, the routing I proposed allows the 170 to still serve these areas of Battersea and also have more taller buses to run it (hopefully not Streetlites). Here's what I proposed. View AttachmentI believe that routing is only possible in one direction due to part of the road being one way, and it would require shorter buses due to parked cars and the tight turn from Battersea High St to Gwynne Road, so it wouldn't be feasible to divert the 170 that way.
|
|