|
Post by kmkcheng on Sept 21, 2024 10:52:18 GMT
Hypothetically, could a route be run from two garages. For example, running the 110 from both AV and V? Probably due to space but wouldn't it also decrease the length of deadruns. Has something like this happened before? Certainly in the LT days it was common for routes to be operated by 2 or more garages, mainly due to routes being a lot longer back then. It has been a lot less common in the privatisation era. There has been many examples of routes operated by more than 1 garage. Recent ones included X140 and 125 which both had some CP workings whilst the main allocation was SO and BT respectively. There are some night routes that have more than one garage operating it. For example the N98 is worked out of HD and AC.
|
|
|
Post by LT 20181 on Sept 21, 2024 11:18:30 GMT
Hypothetically, could a route be run from two garages. For example, running the 110 from both AV and V? Probably due to space but wouldn't it also decrease the length of deadruns. Has something like this happened before? The 183 was run by BT & SO at two points, once between 1999 & 2001 and then again between 2015 & 2018.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 21, 2024 11:50:44 GMT
Hypothetically, could a route be run from two garages. For example, running the 110 from both AV and V? Probably due to space but wouldn't it also decrease the length of deadruns. Has something like this happened before? I think NP and SW did this with the 19. Sometimes with drivers, 280 runs out of GM but involves A and AL, the 157 is out of AL with support from C drivers, and the 337 with SW/AF.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Sept 21, 2024 12:08:40 GMT
Hypothetically, could a route be run from two garages. For example, running the 110 from both AV and V? Probably due to space but wouldn't it also decrease the length of deadruns. Has something like this happened before? I think NP and SW did this with the 19. Sometimes with drivers, 280 runs out of GM but involves A and AL, the 157 is out of AL with support from C drivers, and the 337 with SW/AF. Also the 44 is SW with AL support and under Travel London was the N3 from BC with QB doing one bus support at weekends
|
|
jake
Cleaner
Posts: 32
|
Post by jake on Sept 21, 2024 13:00:16 GMT
Why isn't it that common any more?
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Sept 21, 2024 13:46:06 GMT
Why isn't it that common any more? Routes being much shorter, cheaper to base a route at one garage.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 21, 2024 14:00:41 GMT
Why isn't it that common any more? Routes being much shorter, cheaper to base a route at one garage. Also think it has to do with route ownership. If a route is based at one garage and is performing badly, that garage owns the problem. If it is operated by two garages, sure garages will blame the other for the poor performance.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 21, 2024 14:40:50 GMT
I think NP and SW did this with the 19. Sometimes with drivers, 280 runs out of GM but involves A and AL, the 157 is out of AL with support from C drivers, and the 337 with SW/AF. Also the 44 is SW with AL support and under Travel London was the N3 from BC with QB doing one bus support at weekends Not just SW but also AL support and they still can’t stop abandoning WSDs???
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Sept 21, 2024 15:10:08 GMT
I think NP and SW did this with the 19. Sometimes with drivers, 280 runs out of GM but involves A and AL, the 157 is out of AL with support from C drivers, and the 337 with SW/AF. Also the 44 is SW with AL support and under Travel London was the N3 from BC with QB doing one bus support at weekends There are a lot of examples of these, nowadays its only ever happening on night routes that are very long or garages that are struggling with space.
|
|
|
Post by WLT892 on Sept 21, 2024 18:02:36 GMT
I think NP and SW did this with the 19. Sometimes with drivers, 280 runs out of GM but involves A and AL, the 157 is out of AL with support from C drivers, and the 337 with SW/AF. Also the 44 is SW with AL support and under Travel London was the N3 from BC with QB doing one bus support at weekends Nothing can beat Route 345 when it was operated by Go-Ahead back in the year 2000, this route at one time had four garages running the route operated by Q, PM, SW and NX altogether, seriously!
|
|
|
Post by mkay315 on Sept 21, 2024 18:47:24 GMT
Also the 44 is SW with AL support and under Travel London was the N3 from BC with QB doing one bus support at weekends Nothing can beat Route 345 when it was operated by Go-Ahead back in the year 2000, this route at one time had four garages running the route operated by Q, PM, SW and NX altogether, seriously! That really was a "you just had to see it moment" back in that era. 😂
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Sept 21, 2024 19:07:33 GMT
Route 137 ran quite well between BN & N for 7 years only one changeover point alongside buses running light to and from N for meal reliefs and finishing and starting duties and if buses were running late leaving N the controller at BN would send out the next available bus if the driver was available. The LTs were never based at one garage overnight they would float between the two, however on paper they had the official garages and was reflected by the Garage codes.
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Sept 21, 2024 23:24:46 GMT
Hypothetically, could a route be run from two garages. For example, running the 110 from both AV and V? Probably due to space but wouldn't it also decrease the length of deadruns. Has something like this happened before? I would rather the entire 110 transfer to V to be honest. I think they did a pretty smashing job on the 391 for the most part when they had it, much better than FW and what AV are doing now on the 110. But that would affect the workload at AV too much, with no work coming in.
|
|
exbox
Conductor
Posts: 130
|
Post by exbox on Sept 22, 2024 4:40:56 GMT
Routes being much shorter, cheaper to base a route at one garage. Also think it has to do with route ownership. If a route is based at one garage and is performing badly, that garage owns the problem. If it is operated by two garages, sure garages will blame the other for the poor performance. Yes this is the main reason. It’s hard for separate garages with their own management structure to effectively work together because when the chips are down both will rationally prioritise their own part of the operation. Plus drivers from garage 1 don’t always listen to a supervisor from garage 2 and vice versa. Then you have engineering - engineers from garage 2 won’t prioritise a failed bus from garage 1 when they are almost certainly busy with their own issues. . All of these problems are solvable but they are real and as a result dual allocation is never a first choice. It has worked successfully in the past but more often it’s tried and then abandoned at the first opportunity.
|
|
|
Post by VH45241 on Sept 22, 2024 5:11:30 GMT
Hypothetically, could a route be run from two garages. For example, running the 110 from both AV and V? Probably due to space but wouldn't it also decrease the length of deadruns. Has something like this happened before? Route 258 is operated by both Park Royal rp and Harrow so. Earlies and lates are covered by Park Royal and middles by Harrow. Park Royal would bring their buses out in the morning and bring them back at the end of the day whilst Harrow would travel to Harrow bus station and do live changeovers
|
|