|
|
Post by COBO on Jun 10, 2024 17:23:22 GMT
That bridge is low but I think double deckers can go under that bridge. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jun 10, 2024 18:01:07 GMT
He said low bridge on 440 old route and the only low bridge I can think that it ran under was on Fishers Lane. bridge just before bollo lane railway crossing. Before 440 turns into Chiswick business park there low bridge 272  Here? Or here?  |
|
|
|
Post by secretbu5dude on Jun 10, 2024 19:30:03 GMT
That bridge is low but I think double deckers can go under that bridge. I reckon they could. I thibk i remember reading that 88 (pre 94) used to terminate at Turnham Green. I'd have to check that again |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jun 10, 2024 21:24:11 GMT
Does the controller at WK tell the 105 drivers to just stand wherever when they terminate at Greenford Station or do the drivers just stand whether at Greenford Station? Because it seems like the 105s just stand whether including the stand that’s closed rather then stand at the temporary stand at Westway Cross.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 10, 2024 23:13:49 GMT
bridge just before bollo lane railway crossing. Before 440 turns into Chiswick business park there low bridge 272 Here? Or here? Neither of those bridges are low - the only one that is low is on Fishers Lane nearby - ignoring electric deckers which are slightly higher, most full height deckers are 14'6" |
|
|
|
Post by Dad91 on Jun 11, 2024 2:26:45 GMT
Here? Or here? Neither of those bridges are low - the only one that is low is on Fishers Lane nearby - ignoring electric deckers which are slightly higher, most full height deckers are 14'6" that's the Bridge it's not low I do remember COVID 440 was DDs temporary. It's other bridge were 272 pass |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Jun 11, 2024 16:58:38 GMT
I meant the second bridge, I thought it was lower than that. Anyway the 440 had already been rerouted via the Business Park by the time COVID struck.
|
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Jun 11, 2024 16:59:43 GMT
85's timetable change later this month OUCH!!! Just........OUCH!!! Anyone know what the PVR will be after this - I assume it'll be 12 considering that was what the route was awarded as. |
|
|
|
Post by ! ALEED on Jun 11, 2024 18:08:26 GMT
85's timetable change later this month OUCH!!! Just........OUCH!!! Anyone know what the PVR will be after this - I assume it'll be 12 considering that was what the route was awarded as. Yep, 12. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Jun 12, 2024 7:07:30 GMT
Don’t know if this has been mentioned but OMEs are now starting to creep onto the 452. Don’t know if this is a phased conversion or not
|
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jun 12, 2024 11:04:19 GMT
Don’t know if this has been mentioned but OMEs are now starting to creep onto the 452. Don’t know if this is a phased conversion or not If this is the case, I wonder if this is a full or partial allocation, and what will happen to the 452's current allocation? It would make sense to withdrawn the VDWs, and maybe the non-standard and unreliable WHs too - but I could see the VMHs remain in the fleet. If released from the 452, maybe these Evosetis could complete the E3's new allocation? I still think though it would be simpler to just fully allocate the ex-28 OMEs to the 295 (which has the same PVR) - simplifying allocations, plus giving more flexibility with the BCE fleet. The 452 is also up for tender soon so may not be retained. The 295 is already allocated at least 2 OMEs, since some of the 72reg batch moved to SO, but it's also likely FW will be needing some more BCEs, and those at X would be the easiest to transfer. The 65's PVR has recently gone up by 3, but nothing additional was transferred into FW. Then for the new contracts, the 281 is going up by 2, and the 371 up by 1 (though could be an extra SD if available). So it could make sense for the 452 to just use any BCEs that are still spare after these PVR changes, with the OMEs providing a more permanent allocation to the 295? |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Jun 12, 2024 11:11:02 GMT
Don’t know if this has been mentioned but OMEs are now starting to creep onto the 452. Don’t know if this is a phased conversion or not If this is the case, I wonder if this is a full or partial allocation, and what will happen to the 452's current allocation? It would make sense to withdrawn the VDWs, and maybe the non-standard and unreliable WHs too - but I could see the VMHs remain in the fleet. If released from the 452, maybe these Evosetis could complete the E3's new allocation? I still think though it would be simpler to just fully allocate the ex-28 OMEs to the 295 (which has the same PVR) - simplifying allocations, plus giving more flexibility with the BCE fleet. The 452 is also up for tender soon so may not be retained. The 295 is already allocated at least 2 OMEs, since some of the 72reg batch moved to SO, but it's also likely FW will be needing some more BCEs, and those at X would be the easiest to transfer. The 65's PVR has recently gone up by 3, but nothing additional was transferred into FW. Then for the new contracts, the 281 is going up by 2, and the 371 up by 1 (though could be an extra SD if available). So it could make sense for the 452 to just use any BCEs that are still spare after these PVR changes, with the OMEs providing a more permanent allocation to the 295? You might think it’s simpler but don’t forget you are looking on from the outside. I assume the delay in introducing them onto other was routes was down to blinds needing to be updated and possibly type training. |
|
|
|
Post by secretbu5dude on Jun 12, 2024 11:39:26 GMT
85's timetable change later this month OUCH!!! Just........OUCH!!! The fact that the PVR went from 15 to 12 buses for a route like that is very shocking too, wonder how it will do with that new timetable. Correction, looked like a typo! Every 10 minutes #everybodybreathe |
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Jun 13, 2024 12:03:41 GMT
1 hour+ gap on the 235 in Sunbury today. Managed to get a 290 > 285 which managed to beat it.
Sometimes I scratch my head wondering why people want this operator winning more… If anything they should be losing.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Jun 13, 2024 12:49:49 GMT
1 hour+ gap on the 235 in Sunbury today. Managed to get a 290 > 285 which managed to beat it. Sometimes I scratch my head wondering why people want this operator winning more… If anything they should be losing. One bad grape doesn’t spoil the whole bunch. TfL don’t look at the overall and only judge routes as individuals, as they should. |
|
