|
Post by ThinLizzy on Jul 9, 2020 12:00:10 GMT
Route N15 currently has several workings crosslinked with the 5 - though if the 5 and 15 were to be awarded to different operators on next retender, the N15 would need to be fully linked to the day route 15. The 15 and N15 both have a PVR of 23, effectively giving a net of 0 - so this likely means that an operator/garage could be completely full but still win the 15/N15? I think any operator would struggle to maintain a 24-hour PVR level. Even though the N15 PVR is slightly lower during the week and 15 PVR is lower at weekends, it would mean an increased "TVR." The "TVR" could only be reduced if the 15 went to a garage with a number of LTs already allocated, or the 15/N15 converted back to conventional vehicles. The only thing that could cause an issue is if the 15 received a 2 year extension and the 5 didn't, or vice-versa. That being said, there have been some pretty wacky solutions in the past including N25 duties running off the 369 in Firsts days, or the N550/N551 being linked with the 262
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 9, 2020 12:01:25 GMT
Route N15 currently has several workings crosslinked with the 5 - though if the 5 and 15 were to be awarded to different operators on next retender, the N15 would need to be fully linked to the day route 15. The 15 and N15 both have a PVR of 23, effectively giving a net of 0 - so this likely means that an operator/garage could be completely full but still win the 15/N15? Potentially, however in this case I'd assume they'd order quite a number of spares to allow overnight maintenance on every bus frequently. It would knacker the buses. I think the N15 would be better off being placed on the 5s tender as opposed to the 15s tender. The 5 is a bigger route so should give more leeway in terms of PVR should the routes get split upon tender anytime. I suppose wherever the 15 would go, the N15 could also use vehicles off other day routes at the same garage. Or even a split operation between garages, e.g. AE/DX or BW/NS. The N15 currently needs LTs but probably uses some of the EL1/2/3 allocations as well. I think the N199 is another example of this, though as above probably uses any vehicles from TL, rather than all directly from the 199. Though whichever method an operator might take, I assume it is possible for a full garage to take on the 15/N15, as long as there are other routes to available to provide part of the night allocation?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 9, 2020 12:07:49 GMT
Potentially, however in this case I'd assume they'd order quite a number of spares to allow overnight maintenance on every bus frequently. It would knacker the buses. I think the N15 would be better off being placed on the 5s tender as opposed to the 15s tender. The 5 is a bigger route so should give more leeway in terms of PVR should the routes get split upon tender anytime. I suppose wherever the 15 would go, the N15 could also use vehicles off other day routes at the same garage. Or even a split operation between garages, e.g. AE/DX or BW/NS. The N15 currently needs LTs but probably uses some of the EL1/2/3 allocations as well. I think the N199 is another example of this, though as above probably uses any vehicles from TL, rather than all directly from the 199. Though whichever method an operator might take, I assume it is possible for a full garage to take on the 15/N15, as long as there are other routes to available to provide part of the night allocation? Yeah the N15 is predominantly made up out of LTs from the ELT as opposed to directly from the 15 so could pose issues to any garage which doesn't already have LTs should TfL want it to remain an LT route. This means on BW could really compete and that already has a lot of LTs out on the N8 anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2020 15:10:33 GMT
I suppose wherever the 15 would go, the N15 could also use vehicles off other day routes at the same garage. Or even a split operation between garages, e.g. AE/DX or BW/NS. The N15 currently needs LTs but probably uses some of the EL1/2/3 allocations as well. I think the N199 is another example of this, though as above probably uses any vehicles from TL, rather than all directly from the 199. Though whichever method an operator might take, I assume it is possible for a full garage to take on the 15/N15, as long as there are other routes to available to provide part of the night allocation? Yeah the N15 is predominantly made up out of LTs from the ELT as opposed to directly from the 15 so could pose issues to any garage which doesn't already have LTs should TfL want it to remain an LT route. This means on BW could really compete and that already has a lot of LTs out on the N8 anyway. I wonder why the N15 suddenly swapped over to full LT operation after years of mix LT and EH and fully standard deckers under Stagecoach! Another option is run the 15 from WH using LTs during the day and standard double deckers of a night as plenty of spares at WH as they only run the N474.
|
|
|
Post by george on Jul 9, 2020 17:13:20 GMT
Yeah the N15 is predominantly made up out of LTs from the ELT as opposed to directly from the 15 so could pose issues to any garage which doesn't already have LTs should TfL want it to remain an LT route. This means on BW could really compete and that already has a lot of LTs out on the N8 anyway. I wonder why the N15 suddenly swapped over to full LT operation after years of mix LT and EH and fully standard deckers under Stagecoach! Another option is run the 15 from WH using LTs during the day and standard double deckers of a night as plenty of spares at WH as they only run the N474. This is what I've been wondering as well. Thought it was just something during lockdown but seems not.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jul 9, 2020 22:00:27 GMT
I just thought about this, when buses are trapped in cordons or something or like a cordon and they are right next to it, and no place to turn around what do bus operators do? For example, the crash at Finsbury Park the other day had some W7’s trapped right next to it maybe about 3 on Stroud Green Road and I dont even think the road is wide or long enough for a 360 turn? With the buses trapped, I imagine theres a huge gap in service? Do garages find extra vehicles for the route or do they just have to work with the gap in service? There would be gaps in service, these are alleviated at times by stretching departure times at terminals, widening headways of buses and if anything utilising any spare buses by getting relief crews to take a bus from the garage.
A controller from the operators with the buses stuck may be sent out if London Buses (NTC) Network Traffic Controller cannot attend. Buses are usually turned around by reversing with assistance and turning around using a side road. At times the best port of call would be for drivers to assist each other to turn around their buses if possible.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jul 9, 2020 22:02:30 GMT
Isn't self-curtailing a sackable offence? If it was indeed taking an unauthorised shortcut, I wouldn't be risking my job over something like that It absolutely is. Constitutes gross misconduct. That said, although it doesn't happen often, I have known it to happen in the past although there could be any number of reasons why it could have happened. Could well have been running late and instructed to do it by the controller and the driver just couldn't be bothered to explain it to passengers properly (happens alot). It also can be seen as fraud if the driver did not do this and TfL do not take kindly at all to this as they are paying for the mileage.
|
|
|
Post by londonbusboy on Jul 9, 2020 23:14:30 GMT
I was on 337 earlier very close to Clapham Junction station when all of a sudden at (Plough Road) driver announced that he was terminating there and I quote "this service has to terminate here because the road ahead is blocked" thought it was strange as seemed like other routes weren't affected but thought problem could be on St Johns Road anyway there wasn't anything blocking the road there so I can only think that driver terminated early to get to stand quicker. If stops are missed the company will know and ask the driver why. Obviously if it was authorized they wont because the controller enters the relevant lost mileage on the computer.
|
|
|
Post by londonbusboy on Jul 9, 2020 23:17:42 GMT
I was on 337 earlier very close to Clapham Junction station when all of a sudden at (Plough Road) driver announced that he was terminating there and I quote "this service has to terminate here because the road ahead is blocked" thought it was strange as seemed like other routes weren't affected but thought problem could be on St Johns Road anyway there wasn't anything blocking the road there so I can only think that driver terminated early to get to stand quicker. Could also be that the driver was on his trip for meal break or last trip before finishing in which you cannot enter a curtailment into the MDT. Some controllers also tell drivers to curtail at short notice.
|
|
|
Post by george on Jul 9, 2020 23:22:49 GMT
I was on 337 earlier very close to Clapham Junction station when all of a sudden at (Plough Road) driver announced that he was terminating there and I quote "this service has to terminate here because the road ahead is blocked" thought it was strange as seemed like other routes weren't affected but thought problem could be on St Johns Road anyway there wasn't anything blocking the road there so I can only think that driver terminated early to get to stand quicker. Could also be that the driver was on his trip for meal break or last trip before finishing in which you cannot enter a curtailment into the MDT. Some controllers also tell drivers to curtail at short notice. I did find it strange at the time but I think it's likely that the controller told driver to terminate there for whatever reason.
|
|
|
Post by northlondonbuses on Jul 15, 2020 15:39:10 GMT
I find it so funny how TFLs own plan backfired on them horribly as the same month they introduce front door boarding on routemasters to stop losing money the same month back door boarding was introduced and no one could pay cause they stop the Oyster card readers on the route masters and as a result they nearly went bankrupt and nearly had to stop bus services altogether
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Jul 15, 2020 15:43:39 GMT
I find it so funny how TFLs own plan backfired on them horribly as the same month they introduce front door boarding on routemasters to stop losing money the same month back door boarding was introduced and no one could pay cause they stop the Oyster card readers on the route masters and as a result they nearly went bankrupt and nearly had to stop bus services altogether There were more factors to TfL "almost going bankrupt" than the introduction of read door boarding on buses. Even with hindsight, it was better to introduce rear door boarding to protect staff- with the short timeframe there was little time available to create a solution across London to allow fares to be taken with middle door boarding.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2020 15:52:23 GMT
I find it so funny how TFLs own plan backfired on them horribly as the same month they introduce front door boarding on routemasters to stop losing money the same month back door boarding was introduced and no one could pay cause they stop the Oyster card readers on the route masters and as a result they nearly went bankrupt and nearly had to stop bus services altogether Front door boarding was introduced last summer on route 8 and the 55 after that so been longer than a few months.
|
|
|
Post by northlondonbuses on Jul 15, 2020 16:09:53 GMT
I find it so funny how TFLs own plan backfired on them horribly as the same month they introduce front door boarding on routemasters to stop losing money the same month back door boarding was introduced and no one could pay cause they stop the Oyster card readers on the route masters and as a result they nearly went bankrupt and nearly had to stop bus services altogether Front door boarding was introduced last summer on route 8 and the 55 after that so been longer than a few months. Ik but most of the other routes became front door on I think the 7th of March
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 15, 2020 16:42:56 GMT
I find it so funny how TFLs own plan backfired on them horribly as the same month they introduce front door boarding on routemasters to stop losing money the same month back door boarding was introduced and no one could pay cause they stop the Oyster card readers on the route masters and as a result they nearly went bankrupt and nearly had to stop bus services altogether There were more factors to TfL "almost going bankrupt" than the introduction of read door boarding on buses. Even with hindsight, it was better to introduce rear door boarding to protect staff- with the short timeframe there was little time available to create a solution across London to allow fares to be taken with middle door boarding. Rear door boarding didn’t protect staff given staff already had protection from the front seats being taped off & the assault screen which was sealed up further. Instead, rear door boarding made passengers less safe.
|
|