|
Post by bertrell on Dec 2, 2020 14:23:01 GMT
Just spotted elsewhere, the following orders for the recent tender wins have been alledglly placed.. FW- 55 AD BYD 10.9m/ 65/281 20x 10.9m AD 10.9 m for the 290 & 371 LS- 38 AD BYD 10.9m 183 & X140 22 AD BYD 10.9m H9 & H10 is it True or false? The 22 for SO is actually 18 for the H9/10 and 4 for the 398. Should be 22 BYD 10.9m E200 for the 371 & 290 (including spares.) FW is 54 for the 281/65 (including spares) + 1 for route 371. That's what I saw, nothing for the 398 or 49 just yet...
|
|
|
Post by adl on Dec 2, 2020 14:25:33 GMT
The 22 for SO is actually 18 for the H9/10 and 4 for the 398. Should be 22 BYD 10.9m E200 for the 371 & 290 (including spares.) FW is 54 for the 281/65 (including spares) + 1 for route 371. That's what I saw, nothing for the 398 or 49 just yet... What I think is that the 22 is inclusive of the 398, I doubt there are going to be 4 spares on order for the H9/H10, the 398 has a PVR of 3 and a TVR of 4.
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Dec 2, 2020 14:34:09 GMT
Well done to RATP for winning the 117.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 2, 2020 14:36:34 GMT
Just spotted elsewhere, the following orders for the recent tender wins have been alledglly placed.. FW- 55 AD BYD 10.9m/ 65/281 20x 10.9m AD 10.9 m for the 290 & 371 LS- 38 AD BYD 10.9m 183 & X140 22 AD BYD 10.9m H9 & H10 is it True or false? Where was this posted?
|
|
|
Post by mkay315 on Dec 2, 2020 14:41:46 GMT
Well done to RATP for winning the 117. Ahhhh. Looks like RATP are on a run now
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2020 19:10:13 GMT
Just spotted elsewhere, the following orders for the recent tender wins have been alledglly placed.. FW- 55 AD BYD 10.9m/ 65/281 20x 10.9m AD 10.9 m for the 290 & 371 LS- 38 AD BYD 10.9m 183 & X140 22 AD BYD 10.9m H9 & H10 is it True or false? Since a DLE going on the 398 was banned being 10.9m, could this be a slight issue. The H9/10 might also have an issue at Harrow Leisure Centre especially with a tight turn
|
|
|
Post by busdryver on Dec 2, 2020 19:21:51 GMT
Just spotted elsewhere, the following orders for the recent tender wins have been alledglly placed.. FW- 55 AD BYD 10.9m/ 65/281 20x 10.9m AD 10.9 m for the 290 & 371 LS- 38 AD BYD 10.9m 183 & X140 22 AD BYD 10.9m H9 & H10 is it True or false? Since a DLE going on the 398 was banned being 10.9m, could this be a slight issue. The H9/10 might also have an issue at Harrow Leisure Centre especially with a tight turn The numbers don’t add up correctly - the DD on 371 are missing, the H9/10 and 398 are both size limited to max 10.5, so the 10.9s won’t fit... Plus nothing for the 49 either... Looks to be someone guessing!
|
|
|
Post by busdryver on Dec 2, 2020 19:22:28 GMT
Well done to RATP for winning the 117. Ahhhh. Looks like RATP are on a run now Looking forward to this one
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Dec 2, 2020 20:05:37 GMT
The 371 may have an HV used on it as the spec did say some journeys operated by hybrid DD and diesel SDs.
|
|
|
Post by BusesInLondon on Dec 2, 2020 21:24:23 GMT
Ahhhh. Looks like RATP are on a run now Looking forward to this one RATP have definitely learnt and adapted from their mistakes made on earlier tenders/bids, which is a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Volvo on Dec 3, 2020 8:27:01 GMT
Since a DLE going on the 398 was banned being 10.9m, could this be a slight issue. The H9/10 might also have an issue at Harrow Leisure Centre especially with a tight turn The numbers don’t add up correctly - the DD on 371 are missing, the H9/10 and 398 are both size limited to max 10.5, so the 10.9s won’t fit... Plus nothing for the 49 either... Looks to be someone guessing! I know this isn't anything to do with the electrics as the shorter version would be 10.2m so capacity must be different to the 10.9m versions. However I really don't understand the point of the regular 10.9m version seeing as they have the same seating and standing capacity as the 10.5m versions.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 3, 2020 8:55:20 GMT
The numbers don’t add up correctly - the DD on 371 are missing, the H9/10 and 398 are both size limited to max 10.5, so the 10.9s won’t fit... Plus nothing for the 49 either... Looks to be someone guessing! I know this isn't anything to do with the electrics as the shorter version would be 10.2m so capacity must be different to the 10.9m versions. However I really don't understand the point of the regular 10.9m version seeing as they have the same seating and standing capacity as the 10.5m versions. The 10.5m only achieves it by being squashed inside. Apart from the obvious effect of less knee-room between seats, having the seats sub-optimal spaced slows people getting in and out of the window seats. There is also a question mark over residuals, the reduced seat spacing might not meet another Operators spec, they may see it as a stretched version of next size below, so price it as a smaller bus The number of 10.5m versions (out of total E200MMCs built) is tiny, might even be under 1%. Possibly no more will be built as London Operators have changed to zero emission single decks
|
|
|
Post by Volvo on Dec 3, 2020 21:49:18 GMT
While I agree with most of your spot I don't agree about the space between the seats trust me. The difference between the two sizes also is actually around the centre of the bus just before the rear doors and also around the wheelchair bay. As noted on a 10. example the little space on the nearside between the 3rd row of seats and the rear doors. I was analyzing this in the last 3 days where I have been on the 303, 326, 303.
|
|
|
Post by paulo on Dec 8, 2020 16:05:34 GMT
I think AV was confirmed previously, but it might have been changed following recent tender results, e.g. if the E1 is run from AV and needs space 🤷♂️ 110 is AV - NOT V... Reference to the 110 operating from V has now been removed from the excellent londonbusroutes.net however AV isn’t confirmed but would now seem very likely. The 398 moved to Harrow this coming Saturday as well. Mention that the 18 reverts to previous timetable. Is this the timetable in place before they stripped it for VHs for the 306?
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 9, 2020 6:56:31 GMT
🤷♂️ 110 is AV - NOT V... Reference to the 110 operating from V has now been removed from the excellent londonbusroutes.net however AV isn’t confirmed but would now seem very likely. The 398 moved to Harrow this coming Saturday as well. Mention that the 18 reverts to previous timetable. Is this the timetable in place before they stripped it for VHs for the 306? The temporary timetable on route 18 will be removed with the frequency of the service restored to run every 5 minutes during the AM peak, midday and PM peak periods on Monday to Fridays and during the daytime on Saturdays, every 6-7 minutes during the daytime on Sundays and every 8 minutes during the evening on all days of the week. And following weekend (19th December) day after school extras finish 272, 440, E3, H91 also lose temporary timetables The temporary timetable on route 272 will be removed with the frequency of the service restored to run every 15 minutes during the AM, Daytime and PM peak periods on Monday to Fridays and during the daytime on Saturdays. The temporary timetable on route 440 will be removed with the frequency of the service restored to run every 15 minutes during the AM, Daytime and PM peak periods on Monday to Fridays and during the daytime on Saturdays. The temporary timetable on route E3 will be removed with the frequency of the service restored to run every 8-9 minutes during the AM, Daytime and PM peak periods on Monday to Fridays and during the daytime on Saturdays. The temporary timetable on route H91 will be removed with the frequency of the service restored to run every 10 minutes during the AM, Daytime and PM peak periods on Monday to Fridays and during the daytime on Saturdays. tfl.gov.uk/modes/buses/bus-changes#on-this-page-8
|
|