|
Post by londonbuses on Apr 15, 2024 21:38:02 GMT
The K5 seems to be using a mix of its own 14-reg buses and the ex S3 64-reg ones (I would've thought they'd keep one batch and withdraw the other). Has the K1 had a PVR increase at some point? Not recently, it was awarded in 2020 with 13 new E200 MMCs and the 2 12-reg E200s, but those 2 older buses can now be displaced by MMCs spare from the 404 and S3.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 15, 2024 23:18:38 GMT
I assume the K1 is now fully MMC SDE. SDE20302 (From the 404) - SDE20315 & 1x 17 reg MMC? Then the K5 part MMC and part E200 Dart. I'd imagine 2x 17 reg and 5x 14 reg E200 Dart. It would only need two MMC's as the K1 had two 12 reg SDE's alongside. I have to admit, it's an odd way to do things regarding the K5 - I was expecting the whole S3 allocation to be disposed of leaving the K5 remaining with the 14 reg SDE's
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Apr 17, 2024 20:06:43 GMT
I wonder whether the possibility of wiring up AV in the very near future is on the table, especially given the H22 and H98 are up for tender and do not have fully compliant allocations at the moment (even for a 3 year contract).
Alternatively they could simply swap routes between AV and WK, with the 116 and 423 moving the other way, but operating the H22 and/or H98 from WK would be less ideal in comparison to AV.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 17, 2024 20:14:20 GMT
I wonder whether the possibility of wiring up AV in the very near future is on the table, especially given the H22 and H98 are up for tender and do not have compliant allocations at the moment (even for a 3 year contract). Alternatively they could simply swap routes between AV and WK, with the 116 and 423 moving the other way, but operating the H22 and/or H98 from WK would be less ideal in comparison to AV. Well with the H98 there are LTs from the SL3 going spare which could be used on another contract. I think WK has space for both the H98 and H22 without having to moving the 116 and 423 out.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Apr 17, 2024 20:23:01 GMT
I wonder whether the possibility of wiring up AV in the very near future is on the table, especially given the H22 and H98 are up for tender and do not have compliant allocations at the moment (even for a 3 year contract). Alternatively they could simply swap routes between AV and WK, with the 116 and 423 moving the other way, but operating the H22 and/or H98 from WK would be less ideal in comparison to AV. Well with the H98 there are LTs from the SL3 going spare which could be used on another contract. I think WK has space for both the H98 and H22 without having to moving the 116 and 423 out. Yes I think WK does have enough space for the H22 and H98, but I highly doubt RATP will empty out AV (unless they plan on closing it) without moving something else in.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 17, 2024 20:27:16 GMT
Well with the H98 there are LTs from the SL3 going spare which could be used on another contract. I think WK has space for both the H98 and H22 without having to moving the 116 and 423 out. Yes I think WK does have enough space for the H22 and H98, but I highly doubt RATP will empty out AV (unless they plan on closing it) without moving something else in. Empty out they still have 110, 117, 203, 419, 696, 697, 698 and H37.
|
|
|
Post by paulo on Apr 18, 2024 5:26:42 GMT
Yes I think WK does have enough space for the H22 and H98, but I highly doubt RATP will empty out AV (unless they plan on closing it) without moving something else in. Empty out they still have 110, 117, 203, 419, 696, 697, 698 and H37. I doubt a garage of that size would be viable with a PVR of 60ish.
|
|
|
Post by S.152 on Apr 19, 2024 6:27:21 GMT
Do the VHs not have ISA?
VH45225 was pulled over by the Met yesterday in Willesden whilst on the N18 at about 5:15. It was reportedly due to the driver doing 50 mph in the 20 zones whilst heading out of central London.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 19, 2024 7:12:42 GMT
Do the VHs not have ISA? VH45225 was pulled over by the Met yesterday in Willesden whilst on the N18 at about 5:15. It was reportedly due to the driver doing 50 mph in the 20 zones whilst heading out of central London. That's funny because all of the B5LHs were factory set as 43 mph speed limited, unless that one slipped through the net.
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Apr 19, 2024 8:42:52 GMT
Do the VHs not have ISA? VH45225 was pulled over by the Met yesterday in Willesden whilst on the N18 at about 5:15. It was reportedly due to the driver doing 50 mph in the 20 zones whilst heading out of central London. Dont believe VH45257 has it either. Unless changed recently.
|
|
|
Post by sp17 on Apr 19, 2024 15:22:21 GMT
Do the VHs not have ISA? VH45225 was pulled over by the Met yesterday in Willesden whilst on the N18 at about 5:15. It was reportedly due to the driver doing 50 mph in the 20 zones whilst heading out of central London. That's funny because all of the B5LHs were factory set as 43 mph speed limited, unless that one slipped through the net. Not all, HV221 is limited to 51mph.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Apr 19, 2024 19:02:00 GMT
Random question but why does RP seem so obsessed with using the 13-reg VHs on the 18? I know the on paper allocations are nominal in practice, but they were sent for the 220 and they seem to spend very little time on the route.
I know a bus is a bus but I’m just intrigued because there must be a reason for it. (Is it due to them being unreliable and with WJ being mid route, the bus is never too far away from the garage in case it goes wrong?)
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Apr 19, 2024 20:12:38 GMT
Random question but why does RP seem so obsessed with using the 13-reg VHs on the 18? I know the on paper allocations are nominal in practice, but they were sent for the 220 and they seem to spend very little time on the route. I know a bus is a bus but I’m just intrigued because there must be a reason for it. (Is it due to them being unreliable and with WJ being mid route, the bus is never too far away from the garage in case it goes wrong?) Perhaps they want to prevent ADEs from going on the 18/N18 which was somewhat regular before the 220's ADEs were replaced. Similarly the 258 sticks to ADEs due to VH speed restrictions and the 220/266 simply use whatever else with no qualms.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Apr 20, 2024 4:58:03 GMT
Random question but why does RP seem so obsessed with using the 13-reg VHs on the 18? I know the on paper allocations are nominal in practice, but they were sent for the 220 and they seem to spend very little time on the route. I know a bus is a bus but I’m just intrigued because there must be a reason for it. (Is it due to them being unreliable and with WJ being mid route, the bus is never too far away from the garage in case it goes wrong?) This does give rise to the possibility that 67-reg Frogfaces become standard on route 220, while routes 18 & 266 gain new buses with RATP or an alternative operator (potentially Metroline).
|
|
|
Post by sjb4277 on Apr 20, 2024 17:27:57 GMT
With the H22 contract being retained by RATP for 3 years it would be good to see DLE30049-53 move over to AV with DLE30053 returning to the H22 after it was transferred over to TV when the H37 Required an extra bus in DXE30290
|
|