|
|
Post by trickymicky on Oct 27, 2024 18:15:07 GMT
Has it improved reliability wise as it was struggling when first introduced even before roadworks started along its routing? The last time I used the 1 (a couple of weeks ago) I was in a convoy of three 1s, so I think it’s still got problems. Canada water to Waterloo hasn't got enough running time for the traffic conditions in that area it would have been a good idea to give a little bit extra time. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Oct 27, 2024 18:20:13 GMT
Usually because the existing vehicles are too old but in this case it's bizarre because 88, 333 and 355 could easily have gone for a 5 year contract with existing buses If SW doesn't get electrified anytime soon it's quite possible the EV's could be based at another garage even if still worked by SW drivers. Exactly and this is the point I tried to make when I said the 333 batch of buses should be a lower priority over other routes but I got shoot down. |
|
|
|
Post by lj61nwc on Oct 27, 2024 18:44:52 GMT
If SW doesn't get electrified anytime soon it's quite possible the EV's could be based at another garage even if still worked by SW drivers. Exactly and this is the point I tried to make when I said the 333 batch of buses should be a lower priority over other routes but I got shoot down. I think your points are different, the one you made about the EBDs being diverted to another route is a perfectly reasonable suggestion but unless I'm misunderstanding something, the OPs suggestion of basing the buses for the 88/333/355 at another garage and have SW based drivers isn't exactly the most logical in the current circumstances with limited GA space in this part of London. Although the one route this may or may not work with is the 355 by keeping it at Q for now. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 27, 2024 18:45:10 GMT
If SW doesn't get electrified anytime soon it's quite possible the EV's could be based at another garage even if still worked by SW drivers. Exactly and this is the point I tried to make when I said the 333 batch of buses should be a lower priority over other routes but I got shoot down. It's not easy reorganising fleets, especially when they're dependent on chargers and even charger types. For some reason there's an obsession to get the 473 EV despite its buses are perfectly fine on it at the moment, DS is a mix of CCS2 and Type 2 chargers and you need to ensure the right type is available for the BD11s before you rush in and introduce them. Otherwise you'll have a mess come run in time. |
|
|
|
Post by lj61nwc on Oct 27, 2024 18:52:35 GMT
would you mind sending them on here bcs i cant access them because im waiting for approval An aerial view showing there were 25 BYDs parked, with 6 in SL colours |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Oct 27, 2024 19:10:31 GMT
Exactly and this is the point I tried to make when I said the 333 batch of buses should be a lower priority over other routes but I got shoot down. I think your points are different, the one you made about the EBDs being diverted to another route is a perfectly reasonable suggestion but unless I'm misunderstanding something, the OPs suggestion of basing the buses for the 88/333/355 at another garage and have SW based drivers isn't exactly the most logical in the current circumstances with limited GA space in this part of London. Although the one route this may or may not work with is the 355 by keeping it at Q for now. Capacity issues at Go Ahead are generally more at the outer London garages, then requiring more routes to move to SW/Q/NX/etc to make space as required. Q should have the space to take on some extra routes temporarily, but the question is whether there are enough chargers for more electric routes to run from there. Though moving something from Q to RA could help once the 153 is lost. It depends on what the extent of the delay is in wiring up SW. Otherwise Go Ahead could just prioritise other EV batches before the 88/333/355, or swap them to other routes until SW is ready (like Stagecoach are doing with the 242/257 batches). |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 27, 2024 19:21:14 GMT
I think your points are different, the one you made about the EBDs being diverted to another route is a perfectly reasonable suggestion but unless I'm misunderstanding something, the OPs suggestion of basing the buses for the 88/333/355 at another garage and have SW based drivers isn't exactly the most logical in the current circumstances with limited GA space in this part of London. Although the one route this may or may not work with is the 355 by keeping it at Q for now. Capacity issues at Go Ahead are generally more at the outer London garages, then requiring more routes to move to SW/Q/NX/etc to make space as required. Q should have the space to take on some extra routes temporarily, but the question is whether there are enough chargers for more electric routes to run from there. Though moving something from Q to RA could help once the 153 is lost. It depends on what the extent of the delay is in wiring up SW. Otherwise Go Ahead could just prioritise other EV batches before the 88/333/355, or swap them to other routes until SW is ready (like Stagecoach are doing with the 242/257 batches). The 355 could presumably remain at Q and they would probably be able to house the 88 and 333 buses even if they are still worked by SW drivers. Q are losing the SL6 and the 100 and possibly the 360 as well could be moved to RA. |
|
|
|
Post by exbox on Oct 27, 2024 20:10:42 GMT
What would be the alternative? Just not bid for any of their own SW routes until the garage was fully wired up, by which time all the work would be awarded to someone else? I’m struggling to understand this, and what quite a number of the rest of you have said. Why not bid without electrics? To me it seems like TfL have fallen for promises Go-Ahead made that they knew were unlikely to be able to be fulfilled. They would be required to submit a compliant bid. They wouldn’t bid with diesels if the contract went past 2030 and if they did bid with diesels and someone else won with electrics, then what? In short they did the right thing. Win the work first and then sort the details out after. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 27, 2024 20:27:53 GMT
An aerial view showing there were 25 BYDs parked, with 6 in SL colours I hate to say it but the more I see pics of them I don't dislike them so much. |
|
|
|
Post by ! ALEED on Oct 27, 2024 20:28:42 GMT
I’m struggling to understand this, and what quite a number of the rest of you have said. Why not bid without electrics? To me it seems like TfL have fallen for promises Go-Ahead made that they knew were unlikely to be able to be fulfilled. They would be required to submit a compliant bid. They wouldn’t bid with diesels if the contract went past 2030 and if they did bid with diesels and someone else won with electrics, then what? In short they did the right thing. Win the work first and then sort the details out after. I agree with you, however I feel like there will more further routes down the line that will be stuck in a similar situation to the 358, in the sense that although electrics may be severely delayed, it might take 1-2 years in the tender for the route to actually receive its intended allocation. Routes that were recently retained with hybrids are also going through the same situation, as the hybrids are stuck on a route that is waiting to be electrified. In East London, I can see the D7, 242 and 277 being delayed for much longer, despite members making comments about HK starting it's electrification works. |
|
|
|
Post by db253 on Oct 27, 2024 21:45:39 GMT
They would be required to submit a compliant bid. They wouldn’t bid with diesels if the contract went past 2030 and if they did bid with diesels and someone else won with electrics, then what? In short they did the right thing. Win the work first and then sort the details out after. I agree with you, however I feel like there will more further routes down the line that will be stuck in a similar situation to the 358, in the sense that although electrics may be severely delayed, it might take 1-2 years in the tender for the route to actually receive its intended allocation. Routes that were recently retained with hybrids are also going through the same situation, as the hybrids are stuck on a route that is waiting to be electrified. In East London, I can see the D7, 242 and 277 being delayed for much longer, despite members making comments about HK starting it's electrification works. Some sort of work is definitely taking place there, they were digging it up when I passed on the train this week. |
|
|
|
Post by paulo on Oct 27, 2024 23:09:26 GMT
An aerial view showing there were 25 BYDs parked, with 6 in SL colours I hate to say it but the more I see pics of them I don't dislike them so much. I didn’t realise that Metroline were taking some of these as well. They look absolutely awful. Guy I work with bought a BYD a few months back. It’s been back in the garage 5 times already. There’s a reason they’re a £100k leas. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 28, 2024 0:49:46 GMT
If the 170 ever gets electrics for its next contract which electric single deckers could possibly go on it? I remember WSs were for its current contract but they were too high for a bridge so the WSs were swapped with the SEs on the 286. So what are electric options for the 170?
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 28, 2024 1:23:30 GMT
If the 170 ever gets electrics for its next contract which electric single deckers could possibly go on it? I remember WSs were for its current contract but they were too high for a bridge so the WSs were swapped with the SEs on the 286. So what are electric options for the 170? They wern't too high for the bridge on Lombard Road in Battersea - the issue is that the signs on the bridge are a lower height than what the WS's are marked us thus making it illegal to pass under. The WS's can actually fit under the bridge without incident as was proven by there continued operation for a good while before they were swapped with the 286's SE's. |
|
|
|
Post by Dad91 on Oct 28, 2024 2:54:54 GMT
Why do TFL and Operators do this before route's get electrified. They never do garage assessment check if the garage Safe to wire up now electric buses arrives store up sitting around. buses be delayed 2 to 3 year's. Go in road
|
|
