|
Post by DW221 on Sept 11, 2024 22:09:00 GMT
Overall doesnt really matter too much as long as theres buses on the route. At the end of the day its still majority LT and the average person wont care as long as it takes them from A to B. From an enthusiast pov nothing wrong with having more variety on the route especially diesels! I have to disagree as other operators generally manage to at least allocate the correct type of buses even if not those allocated on paper. It wasn’t too bad prior to the tender renewal but the route is now a full LT route. What makes me laugh is they send out LTs on school routes. Others are entitled to disagree with me but this is my personal opinion. Thats ok mate have your own opinion but me personally I love variety
|
|
|
Post by DW221 on Sept 11, 2024 22:11:55 GMT
I'm now going to predict the 100 BYDs will be for 129, SL4, 22, 88 and 473. Would the numbers add up? 473 has been confirmed to have the E400 cities. I do agree that it does match the above 4 pvrs of 22/N22, 88, 129 and SL4, but instead of 473, it would be the 321, with that it would match the 100 BYDs potentially being ordered by GAL. They would be 3 spare, which could be either used as spares or could be an opportunity to allocate to school work Uh no 473 never had a confirmed order of any electric since GAL won the route… Always typical of people saying stuff without anything to support their claim… Like others have said many times it would've likely had Ee’s with the 262 if they ordered something…
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 11, 2024 22:13:34 GMT
Overall doesnt really matter too much as long as theres buses on the route. At the end of the day its still majority LT and the average person wont care as long as it takes them from A to B. From an enthusiast pov nothing wrong with having more variety on the route especially diesels! I have to disagree as other operators generally manage to at least allocate the correct type of buses even if not those allocated on paper. It wasn’t too bad prior to the tender renewal but the route is now a full LT route. What makes me laugh is they send out LTs on school routes. Others are entitled to disagree with me but this is my personal opinion. BK mix the standard E400s and the Diesel E400 MMCs between the 62, 145 and 169 as they please. It's no different to what RR are doing.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Sept 11, 2024 22:16:36 GMT
Overall doesnt really matter too much as long as theres buses on the route. At the end of the day its still majority LT and the average person wont care as long as it takes them from A to B. From an enthusiast pov nothing wrong with having more variety on the route especially diesels! I have to disagree as other operators generally manage to at least allocate the correct type of buses even if not those allocated on paper. It wasn’t too bad prior to the tender renewal but the route is now a full LT route. What makes me laugh is they send out LTs on school routes. Others are entitled to disagree with me but this is my personal opinion. Does it really matter what bus type turns up though? All that is really important is that the bus actually turns up and that it is fit for service...something that a couple of operators in particular struggle to do.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 11, 2024 23:08:33 GMT
22 - PVR16/TVR18 88 - PVR21/TVR23/24(?) 129 - PVR22/TVR24/25(?) 473 - PVR9/TVR10 SL4 - PVR18/TVR20 That's slightly over the 100 mark.....There is also reportedly some ADL models coming although unsure whether they are integral or more Ees Surely something has to come soon for the 151 so if it was the integral that would be suitable and possibly the 88 due to PHF. The 473 was also suggested to have an issue with longer DDs. The integral ADL model is 10.5m so anything on the list should be able to take them. I don't think we've had confirmation on possible restrictions for the 473 - it did manage with Omnicity DD's and they are only ever slightly shorter than an Ee and have a cumbersome overhang
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 11, 2024 23:12:51 GMT
Which route are getting these and how many for each route? The honest answers are route isn't known though process of elimination would point to either SL4 or SL7 depending on what speculation you want to follow and no one knows how many there will be
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 11, 2024 23:17:16 GMT
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 AttachmentIf that was possible TfL could have just done that in the first place instead of removing the 170 entirely from multiple backstreets. I think someone mentioned that the WS can technically fit under the bridge anyway but the clearance is lower than what is physically possible but I can’t remember exactly The WS's can fit under the bridge as they were running under it for a good while before the issue was brought to light, it's just a case of breaking the law in doing so because the advertised clearance is lower than the height of a Streetlite.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 11, 2024 23:21:17 GMT
473 has been confirmed to have the E400 cities. I do agree that it does match the above 4 pvrs of 22/N22, 88, 129 and SL4, but instead of 473, it would be the 321, with that it would match the 100 BYDs potentially being ordered by GAL. They would be 3 spare, which could be either used as spares or could be an opportunity to allocate to school work Uh no 473 never had a confirmed order of any electric since GAL won the route… Always typical of people saying stuff without anything to support their claim… Like others have said many times it would've likely had Ee’s with the 262 if they ordered something… Was it not mentioned in a TLB regarding the 473 having an order for Ee's?
|
|
|
Post by DW221 on Sept 11, 2024 23:53:29 GMT
Uh no 473 never had a confirmed order of any electric since GAL won the route… Always typical of people saying stuff without anything to support their claim… Like others have said many times it would've likely had Ee’s with the 262 if they ordered something… Was it not mentioned in a TLB regarding the 473 having an order for Ee's? Was mentioned in TLB 716 “We are still awaiting details for the quantity and vehicle type ordered for the 473” if it was actually getting Ee’s you’d think there would be details of fleet numbers and a set batch for the route etc which never happened.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 12, 2024 2:26:59 GMT
Was it not mentioned in a TLB regarding the 473 having an order for Ee's? Was mentioned in TLB 716 “We are still awaiting details for the quantity and vehicle type ordered for the 473” if it was actually getting Ee’s you’d think there would be details of fleet numbers and a set batch for the route etc which never happened. Not necessarily - several Go-Ahead orders of both Ee's & SEe's never were announced publicly at all and it was a guessing game until the vehicles actually turned up on delivery.
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Sept 12, 2024 5:51:54 GMT
I'm now going to predict the 100 BYDs will be for 129, SL4, 22, 88 and 473. Would the numbers add up? 473 has been confirmed to have the E400 cities. I do agree that it does match the above 4 pvrs of 22/N22, 88, 129 and SL4, but instead of 473, it would be the 321, with that it would match the 100 BYDs potentially being ordered by GAL. They would be 3 spare, which could be either used as spares or could be an opportunity to allocate to school work I think another poster mentioned that my plan would use a little over the 100 vehicles ordered, and if the 473 was replaced with the 321, then that would mean even more vehicles are required. 22/129/SL4/321 and then either 473 or 101 seems to line up the best. Also, I was wondering if this order could be like RATP's VH order in 2016, i.e. these vehicles will become scattered about and used on a variety of their most recent tender gains. This would mean that they don't need to match PVRs or TVRs exactly as topups would be ordered as required.
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Sept 12, 2024 5:54:04 GMT
Surely something has to come soon for the 151 so if it was the integral that would be suitable and possibly the 88 due to PHF. The 473 was also suggested to have an issue with longer DDs. The integral ADL model is 10.5m so anything on the list should be able to take them. I don't think we've had confirmation on possible restrictions for the 473 - it did manage with Omnicity DD's and they are only ever slightly shorter than an Ee and have a cumbersome overhang 49 was similar, Omnicity DDs fit under its original RATP tenure on occasion, but road modifications needed to take place to enable a full allocation of BCEs. Hence the route started its new contract using VHs
|
|
|
Post by lj61nwc on Sept 12, 2024 6:05:02 GMT
Just to clarify, it isn't exactly 100 on order, it's more than 100. So probably just above 100 or maybe in the 110s.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Sept 12, 2024 7:28:17 GMT
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 AttachmentIf that was possible TfL could have just done that in the first place instead of removing the 170 entirely from multiple backstreets. I think someone mentioned that the WS can technically fit under the bridge anyway but the clearance is lower than what is physically possible but I can’t remember exactly The WS Streetlites could most certainly could fit under the bridge, and they did. However the bridge is an arch, and the posted height limit was set at the lowest point above the roadway. The Steetlites have a roof pod which takes their height over that posted limit - but the position of the pod meant the vehicles could still clear the arch.
|
|
se10
Conductor
Posts: 50
|
Post by se10 on Sept 12, 2024 7:59:18 GMT
Me17 back in service according to LVF
|
|