|
Post by snowman on Jul 21, 2024 17:29:46 GMT
’No one wanting the route’ is probably a bit of canteen gossip, although plausible given the number of resources it would require for another operator (ie only Metroline really) to take on. I would guess it’s more to do with certainty over how the route will convert to EV operation given RP is only on lease until 2026, meaning RATP won’t be able to submit an EV bid with any certainty and TfL have to tender the route fairly. It could give Metroline an unfair advantage, and if they don’t want the route then TfL are out of options. So this extra 2 year extension does make a lot of sense EDIT : Although on further reflection it’s entirely plausible RATP wanted to wash their hands of the route completely and no one put a bid in While there is no way route 18 faces replacement by another route, it could be another route 168 which is extended beyond its original 2 year extension. TfL have only got 3.5 months left on 18 contract (last day is 7th November). Possibly RATP don't want it, (or maybe only want it at nearer double existing price). Of course TfL might potentially get desperate and offer a 1 or 2 year extension and have to pay lot extra. We know from TfL Board finance report comments that bus network is millions over budget now as tender prices have jumped lot.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 21, 2024 18:00:29 GMT
While there is no way route 18 faces replacement by another route, it could be another route 168 which is extended beyond its original 2 year extension. TfL have only got 3.5 months left on 18 contract (last day is 7th November). Possibly RATP don't want it, (or maybe only want it at nearer double existing price). Of course TfL might potentially get desperate and offer a 1 or 2 year extension and have to pay lot extra. We know from TfL Board finance report comments that bus network is millions over budget now as tender prices have jumped lot. I'd be very surprised if RATP don't want it, I don't think there's been any existing route they've had that they've not bid again for. I also don't see why desperation would result in a whole year's worth of an extension, multiple times in the past when tenders have been late they've simply extended the contract with the incumbent for a short period of about a month extra (see the 368 in 2016) which will probably what happens in this case if they deem the period between award and assumption to be too short. I think the much more realistic option here is that TfL have a notice of intent ready for the route, and quite possibly have already notified the winning operator but can't award the route until the N518s consultation report is available.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 21, 2024 18:15:03 GMT
TfL have only got 3.5 months left on 18 contract (last day is 7th November). Possibly RATP don't want it, (or maybe only want it at nearer double existing price). Of course TfL might potentially get desperate and offer a 1 or 2 year extension and have to pay lot extra. We know from TfL Board finance report comments that bus network is millions over budget now as tender prices have jumped lot. I'd be very surprised if RATP don't want it, I don't think there's been any existing route they've had that they've not bid again for. I also don't see why desperation would result in a whole year's worth of an extension, multiple times in the past when tenders have been late they've simply extended the contract with the incumbent for a short period of about a month extra (see the 368 in 2016) which will probably what happens in this case if they deem the period between award and assumption to be too short. I think the much more realistic option here is that TfL have a notice of intent ready for the route, and quite possibly have already notified the winning operator but can't award the route until the N518s consultation report is available. Probably doesn't help that RATP still don't know for sure what is happening with the 414. The loss of the 28 and potentially the 414 could probably allow the 18 back into X which may reduce operating costs a bit and allow a profit to be made.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 21, 2024 22:24:38 GMT
So the E3 is the only double decker route at V. Do the double deckers have blinds for the 440?
|
|
|
Post by secretbu5dude on Jul 22, 2024 15:12:09 GMT
So the E3 is the only double decker route at V. Do the double deckers have blinds for the 440? I totally forgot they done that during the lockdown 😵
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 22, 2024 16:26:59 GMT
Some years ago TfL tried to get an operator to extend route 129 from Greenwich Cutty Sark to Blackheath Village. Nobody bid for it. Eventually Stagecoach added the section to route 386 which has suffered resulting delays from the Blackheath sections ever since. Operating routes from several garages always caused problems with each one looking after their own crews. Turning buses short was frequent to get them back to their home garage. I seem to recall a propsoed 228 route from North Greenwich via Greenwich I think to Eltham which didn't receive any bids around 2002/03. I think part of the proposal became the 132 extension but not sure. A little way off RATP territory but just to clarify, the plan replaced by the 132 was an extension of the B16 to North Greenwich from Kidbrooke, over what is now the 335. It would however have missed out the Millennium Village, I assume to avoid longer distance travellers being squeezed out by short-hoppers. The 228 was a rather odd proposal, following the now 129 from North Greenwich to Greenwich, the now 386 to Blackheath Village, then via Lee Road to Lee Green, Eltham Road and then some sort of route covering part of the original 386 around Kidbrooke and Horn Park. I am fascinated by proposals that never made it to fruition and I'm not convinced the 228 or B16 extension as proposed would have worked well. Bringing the topic vaguely back to west London, I have not forgiven TfL for using the 228 number there instead. And don't start me on the 70... 😁
|
|
|
Post by Gary on Jul 24, 2024 7:13:49 GMT
Just the 3 Citaro’s out on 117 this morning!
|
|
|
Post by borneobus on Jul 24, 2024 7:18:37 GMT
Just the 3 Citaro’s out on 117 this morning! I noticed similar yesterday - but none VOR and all have operated in the last ten days. RTP MCM30084 BV66GXY 117 last seen at 19:50 23-07-2024 RTP MCM30085 BV66GXZ 117 West Middlesex Hospital 08:17 71037 Feltham Tesco RTP MCM30086 BV66GYA 117 West Middlesex Hospital 08:17 75999 Dudley Road RTP MCM30087 BV66GYB 117 West Middlesex Hospital 08:18 53070 Isleworth Station/Rennels Wa RTP MCM30088 BV66GYC 117 last seen at 15:41 18-07-2024 RTP MCM30089 BV66GYD 117 last seen at 15:00 22-07-2024 RTP MCM30090 BV66GYE 117 last seen at 07:44 22-07-2024 RTP MCM30091 BV66GYF 117 last seen at 16:20 13-07-2024 RTP MCM30092 BV66GYG 117 last seen at 18:32 21-07-2024
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Jul 24, 2024 10:54:17 GMT
Just the 3 Citaro’s out on 117 this morning! Did we ever find out if they’re withdrawing and replacing them for this new 3 year term? Or are they all VOR due to severe reliability issues?
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jul 24, 2024 11:35:21 GMT
Just the 3 Citaro’s out on 117 this morning! Did we ever find out if they’re withdrawing and replacing them for this new 3 year term? Or are they all VOR due to severe reliability issues? Likely reliability issues, there's not enough spare DLEs anyway to replace them, most will be needed for the 419/H22.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 24, 2024 12:00:15 GMT
Did we ever find out if they’re withdrawing and replacing them for this new 3 year term? Or are they all VOR due to severe reliability issues? Likely reliability issues, there's not enough spare DLEs anyway to replace them, most will be needed for the 419/H22. Do you know for sure if they’re unreliable or not? Citaros are generally regarded as reliable vehicles.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 24, 2024 12:13:15 GMT
Did we ever find out if they’re withdrawing and replacing them for this new 3 year term? Or are they all VOR due to severe reliability issues? Likely reliability issues, there's not enough spare DLEs anyway to replace them, most will be needed for the 419/H22. have the ex 465 and 223 DLEs been claimed?
|
|
|
Post by sp17 on Jul 24, 2024 18:32:34 GMT
Likely reliability issues, there's not enough spare DLEs anyway to replace them, most will be needed for the 419/H22. Do you know for sure if they’re unreliable or not? Citaros are generally regarded as reliable vehicles. If they’re unreliable then that’s RATPs doings, the Citaro is almost like the unbreakable bus, they will just keep going and going. That said the Euro6 models aren’t popular for what ever reason.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 24, 2024 19:05:59 GMT
Likely reliability issues, there's not enough spare DLEs anyway to replace them, most will be needed for the 419/H22. have the ex 465 and 223 DLEs been claimed? I think so. Iv lost track but the I'm sure the 72, 419, H17 and H22 have taken them all.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 24, 2024 19:06:47 GMT
have the ex 465 and 223 DLEs been claimed? I think so. Iv lost track but the I'm sure the 72, 419, H17 and H22 have taken them all. The h17 is operated by Metroline
|
|