|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Jul 8, 2018 16:49:57 GMT
I'm not on the anti-Evoseti bandwagon, I happen to quite like them but they are not without their issues. With some members of the MHV class specifically, some of the window seals are there for show only as if you happen to lean on the window ever so slightly, it might give way - flic.kr/p/26aDGguNot sure how safe this is however, I'm pretty sure windows are supposed to be properly secured. Why would you be leaning on a window? Some people do rest their arm next to the window. The pane of glass shouldn't move, but it did in this case with next to no effort exerted on it. I can't say I have ever experienced this with any other bus type so in my view, it is not normal. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 8, 2018 16:59:18 GMT
Why would you be leaning on a window? Some people do rest their arm next to the window. The pane of glass shouldn't move, but it did in this case with next to no effort exerted on it. I can't say I have ever experienced this with any other bus type so in my view, it is not normal. For those of us who are a tad wider than average then it is perfectly possible to lean on / touch the window. Ditto for resting my arm. In no bus in London service should the window move when touched. Obviously some much older types have hinged windows for escape purposes but that's something else entirely. |
|
|
|
Post by Hassaan on Jul 8, 2018 17:06:55 GMT
Why would you be leaning on a window? Some people do rest their arm next to the window. The pane of glass shouldn't move, but it did in this case with next to no effort exerted on it. I can't say I have ever experienced this with any other bus type so in my view, it is not normal. Not just rest their arm on the window, but also their shoulder or head on it (only need to see the amount of marks left on windows from sweaty shoulders/heads   ). Or leaning with their back on the window when standing. There was also an incident a few years ago where during a fight upstairs on an Arriva DW someone was shoved onto a window and the whole thing (main glass, hopper and rubber) fell out along with the person onto the road below  (it was shown on a TV programme to do with buses). |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jul 8, 2018 17:12:32 GMT
Not been on an EvoSeti bus 13 in the really hot weather - until today. I have travelled on Boilmasters top deck front row and never thought another London bus could compete with how hot they become. All I can say is that the Boilmaster has met its match and more!  The EvoSeti, sorry BakeSeti, felt really hot when I got on, but when I went upstairs it was truly horrendous. I sat down and suddenly my bum felt on fire, from the hot seat.  I dread to think what the temperature was on that bus. I don't know if there was something wrong with this particular bus, or if all EvoSetis are really BakeSetis! I would be surprised if they were given they are manufactured by MCW who I think are Egyptian, a country better known for its heat than cold, so you'd think they would know how to keep a bus cool!
Or, given the route it's on, a BakerStreeti.  Perhaps it should be renamed the OvenSetting? |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jul 9, 2018 12:57:48 GMT
If my memory's correct, August the 13th 2018 will be 30 years since London first had full OPO operation across it's bus network, this being the result of the 12 being the last Routemaster route to convert to Sunday OPO on that day of the week. I remember the 11 was the second to last to convert.
|
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jul 9, 2018 17:00:24 GMT
If my memory's correct, August the 13th 2018 will be 30 years since London first had full OPO operation across it's bus network, this being the result of the 12 being the last Routemaster route to convert to Sunday OPO on that day. I remember the 11 was the second to last to convert. That was the official position, and even the unofficial position for two or three years, but then BW started putting out RMLs amongst the Ts on the 8, with one to three buses every Sunday. Only the once I saw it, but three consecutive journeys were worked by Routemasters. They also occasionally put out an RML on weekday evenings when opo theoretically ruled. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jul 9, 2018 18:49:06 GMT
That was the official position, and even the unofficial position for two or three years, but then BW started putting out RMLs amongst the Ts on the 8, with one to three buses every Sunday. Only the once I saw it, but three consecutive journeys were worked by Routemasters. They also occasionally put out an RML on weekday evenings when opo theoretically ruled. I remember seeing one on the 8 on the fluke whilst on another bus. I was generally gutted when the 88 converted as it meant no more Routemasters through Phipps Bridge... although the area never really had them on the mainstream as the 200 never used them to my knowledge. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jul 9, 2018 21:34:34 GMT
That was the official position, and even the unofficial position for two or three years, but then BW started putting out RMLs amongst the Ts on the 8, with one to three buses every Sunday. Only the once I saw it, but three consecutive journeys were worked by Routemasters. They also occasionally put out an RML on weekday evenings when opo theoretically ruled. I remember seeing one on the 8 on the fluke whilst on another bus. I was generally gutted when the 88 converted as it meant no more Routemasters through Phipps Bridge... although the area never really had them on the mainstream as the 200 never used them to my knowledge. I don't believe the 200 ever saw a RM. There were surprisingly few routes which, over a period of years, could have seen an RM because they were allocated to other routes from the same garage, with the policy of Routemastering as many routes as possible at weekends, that in fact never saw them. The 189 at AL would have been in the same position. Of the routes I knew well, the 160/A at Catford never saw a RM either. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 12, 2018 15:28:01 GMT
For those of you who are waiting in earnest for the 2017/18 bus patronage numbers I have had a reply from TfL. Only took 1 month and 1 day and with two lots of chasing to get it. (rolls eyes) Unforunately it's so loosely worded that we could be waiting til this time next year before they actually emerge. I have gone back to TfL asking them to confirm that the following *actually* means. Why can't they just say "we will publish it by date "x" " instead of all that hedged about nonsense?  |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jul 12, 2018 15:41:16 GMT
For those of you who are waiting in earnest for the 2017/18 bus patronage numbers I have had a reply from TfL. Only took 1 month and 1 day and with two lots of chasing to get it. (rolls eyes) Unforunately it's so loosely worded that we could be waiting til this time next year before they actually emerge. I have gone back to TfL asking them to confirm that the following *actually* means. Why can't they just say "we will publish it by date "x" " instead of all that hedged about nonsense? Well done snoggle in getting this far. As I read what they are saying is that they expect to publish by end August. 'Expect', of course is not 'will', so it doesn't mean a lot and for the life of me I really struggle to understand the delay. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 12, 2018 16:44:08 GMT
Well done snoggle in getting this far. As I read what they are saying is that they expect to publish by end August. 'Expect', of course is not 'will', so it doesn't mean a lot and for the life of me I really struggle to understand the delay. Ta. I have gone back and queried why it can't be turned round in a matter of hours given all the data is either used for contractual and payment purposes each period (kilometrage operated) or is otherwise published per period / in the annual report (the actual patronage numbers). I know there are aspects of "fiddle factor" to account for non Oyster / CPC tickets / non London concessionary tickets and that there is "debate" about the reasons for lost kilometrage but even so this stuff is all processed very regularly because it HAS to be! All the published info is is a summation, at route level, of 13 periods worth of data. As TfL MUST employ competent people to run these processes I struggle to see the issue with adding up 2x13 data sets per route and sticking it in a spreadsheet. Anyone with moderate Excel skills can do this. I did suggest that if my name was "Mike Brown" the query might have been answered long ago. The irony is that if I had submitted a FOI request in June TfL would have been required to have answered it by now (although their FOI responsiveness swings between OK and utterly sh*t IME). |
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jul 12, 2018 18:40:51 GMT
Well done snoggle in getting this far. As I read what they are saying is that they expect to publish by end August. 'Expect', of course is not 'will', so it doesn't mean a lot and for the life of me I really struggle to understand the delay. Ta. I have gone back and queried why it can't be turned round in a matter of hours given all the data is either used for contractual and payment purposes each period (kilometrage operated) or is otherwise published per period / in the annual report (the actual patronage numbers). I know there are aspects of "fiddle factor" to account for non Oyster / CPC tickets / non London concessionary tickets and that there is "debate" about the reasons for lost kilometrage but even so this stuff is all processed very regularly because it HAS to be! All the published info is is a summation, at route level, of 13 periods worth of data. As TfL MUST employ competent people to run these processes I struggle to see the issue with adding up 2x13 data sets per route and sticking it in a spreadsheet. Anyone with moderate Excel skills can do this. I did suggest that if my name was "Mike Brown" the query might have been answered long ago. The irony is that if I had submitted a FOI request in June TfL would have been required to have answered it by now (although their FOI responsiveness swings between OK and utterly sh*t IME). I am tempted to put in FoI request myself and ask for the figures for each of the 13 periods. That will give the annual figures as well as perhaps some useful monthly (well four weekly) data. They might even respond sooner based on FoI requirements. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 13, 2018 0:12:11 GMT
I am tempted to put in FoI request myself and ask for the figures for each of the 13 periods. That will give the annual figures as well as perhaps some useful monthly (well four weekly) data. They might even respond sooner based on FoI requirements. They might but then the annual numbers will no doubt be delayed in consequence. I'm beginning to wonder if the relevant department now has 1 part time member of staff who only works 2 days a week. I do have a FOI request "up my sleeve" which is for 6xx school routes. TfL released several years' worth of data on those services to the Assembly but haven't provided them for the last 5 years. TfL themselves say the data is "not reliable" but the kilometrage MUST be reliable or how do the operators get paid? I can understand the concern about the "accuracy" of Oyster card validation on scholars services but I don't believe TfL ignore the info themselves. They must take a view as to its veracity and make considered views about the level of provision. If they don't do this how have they justified the withdrawal of several 6xx services in recent years and the recent axeing of trips from the 143(D) route? EDIT - I had a further E Mail yesterday evening (!) which provided more detail. Seems there has been a new system introduced for the data processing and also some data issues. There has also been a need to recalibrate a previous year's data using the new system. This explains the delay this year and why there is some hesitancy around the possible publication date. While I know organisations don't like "washing their dirty laundry in public" I'd have been more understanding if I'd been told this earlier. Time to be patient I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jul 13, 2018 14:00:06 GMT
Well done snoggle in getting this far. As I read what they are saying is that they expect to publish by end August. 'Expect', of course is not 'will', so it doesn't mean a lot and for the life of me I really struggle to understand the delay. Ta. I have gone back and queried why it can't be turned round in a matter of hours given all the data is either used for contractual and payment purposes each period (kilometrage operated) or is otherwise published per period / in the annual report (the actual patronage numbers). I know there are aspects of "fiddle factor" to account for non Oyster / CPC tickets / non London concessionary tickets and that there is "debate" about the reasons for lost kilometrage but even so this stuff is all processed very regularly because it HAS to be! All the published info is is a summation, at route level, of 13 periods worth of data. As TfL MUST employ competent people to run these processes I struggle to see the issue with adding up 2x13 data sets per route and sticking it in a spreadsheet. Anyone with moderate Excel skills can do this. I did suggest that if my name was "Mike Brown" the query might have been answered long ago. The irony is that if I had submitted a FOI request in June TfL would have been required to have answered it by now (although their FOI responsiveness swings between OK and utterly sh*t IME). Not my position to wonder whether ''Mike Brown'' might be the last person requesting to peruse the data. |
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Jul 14, 2018 13:24:15 GMT
Whilst in Purley waiting for a 127, I spotted that ENX9 is carrying ENX17’s registration at the rear! Surely this has to be taken off the road ASAP?
|
|
). Or leaning with their back on the window when standing.
(it was shown on a TV programme to do with buses). 
The EvoSeti, sorry BakeSeti, felt really hot when I got on, but when I went upstairs it was truly horrendous. I sat down and suddenly my bum felt on fire, from the hot seat. 
