|
Post by WH241 on Sept 25, 2024 16:57:51 GMT
You don't really need any specialist knowledge, routes like the 49,65,125,220 are regularly mentioned on here in less than glowing terms and the ex RATP LTs that are currently at TB are in pretty ropey condition mechanically. Repeating and treating other’s experiences as gospel doesn’t mean you have all knowledge over the subject. It makes you ignorant. I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 25, 2024 17:01:38 GMT
You don't really need any specialist knowledge, routes like the 49,65,125,220 are regularly mentioned on here in less than glowing terms and the ex RATP LTs that are currently at TB are in pretty ropey condition mechanically. Repeating and treating other’s experiences as gospel doesn’t mean you have all knowledge over the subject. It makes you ignorant. Oh the irony, and you're now on my block list 🚫
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 25, 2024 17:02:41 GMT
Repeating and treating other’s experiences as gospel doesn’t mean you have all knowledge over the subject. It makes you ignorant. Oh the irony, and you're now on my block list 🚫 I think you need to slow down and reread what I wrote. The approach general makes everyone ignorant, not just you dear.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Sept 25, 2024 17:16:34 GMT
Repeating and treating other’s experiences as gospel doesn’t mean you have all knowledge over the subject. It makes you ignorant. I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly. I'm sorry, but I can tell you from my own experience of using many different RATP routes very regularly, alongside what I have heard from people both in real life and on this forum, that this "bias" towards RATP that you claim is a thing just does not exist, and they are genuinely just a very poor operator who get a deserved amount of complaints. If you had to cope with using RATP routes daily then you would understand, but with the way you constantly defend them in your posts, it is very very clear you are not a regular user of any RATP route.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 25, 2024 17:33:45 GMT
I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly. I'm sorry, but I can tell you from my own experience of using many different RATP routes very regularly, alongside what I have heard from people both in real life and on this forum, that this "bias" towards RATP that you claim is a thing just does not exist, and they are genuinely just a very poor operator who get a deserved amount of complaints. If you had to cope with using RATP routes daily then you would understand, but with the way you constantly defend them in your posts, it is very very clear you are not a regular user of any RATP route. Are you on every single RATP route at the same time? Are you in multiple locations every minute of every hour of every day on a RATP route? The answer is no to both those questions btw. We’ve all had experiences with all operators but it doesn’t mean that RATP is written off entirely.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Sept 25, 2024 18:00:25 GMT
Because TfL own the routes contract not the bus company. All of your other comments are hearsay / guesswork / speculation on your part. It’ll be interesting to see if anyone else bidder for the 125. Metroline had the opportunity to bid for the 65 and didn’t. So I when people say company x, y or z can run the 65 better , well they didn’t want it. People go on about ratp on here all the time yet have absolutely no specialist knowledge whatsoever about ratp or their preferred operator. Literally just people with opinions , fair enough - but said opinions count for naff all and are just huff and puff You don't really need any specialist knowledge, routes like the 49,65,125,220 are regularly mentioned on here in less than glowing terms and the ex RATP LTs that are currently at TB are in pretty ropey condition mechanically. As a common 220 complaint poster, I do not think RATP deserve major blame, the route is literally impossible (congestion, crowding, inadequate support, etc). And multiple people have already mentioned reasons outside of RATP’s hands as to why the 65 and 125 are in shambles right now and have been for a while.
|
|
|
Post by theferret124 on Sept 25, 2024 20:25:24 GMT
I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly. I'm sorry, but I can tell you from my own experience of using many different RATP routes very regularly, alongside what I have heard from people both in real life and on this forum, that this "bias" towards RATP that you claim is a thing just does not exist, and they are genuinely just a very poor operator who get a deserved amount of complaints. If you had to cope with using RATP routes daily then you would understand, but with the way you constantly defend them in your posts, it is very very clear you are not a regular user of any RATP route. i regularly commute on the K routes, and imo RATP run them pretty well. the only thing i've noticed recently is the K3 being turned at Claygate but that's probably to do in part with kingston council deciding to lay a new set of roadworks every two weeks. as mentioned before the 65 is a hard route to run, especially compared to other routes at FW like the 71 and 281.
obviously this is only really representative of TV and a bit of FW but over the past few months, i've noticed overall improvements in terms of punctuality and turns.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 25, 2024 20:49:08 GMT
I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly. I'm sorry, but I can tell you from my own experience of using many different RATP routes very regularly, alongside what I have heard from people both in real life and on this forum, that this "bias" towards RATP that you claim is a thing just does not exist, and they are genuinely just a very poor operator who get a deserved amount of complaints. If you had to cope with using RATP routes daily then you would understand, but with the way you constantly defend them in your posts, it is very very clear you are not a regular user of any RATP route. If a lot of people are saying the same thing I tend to think it's unlikely that they're all wrong, I'm only an occasional user of RATP routes but I've had bad experiences on routes like the 49 65 and 220 when other routes in the vicinity seemed to be operated normally. If others chose not to believe that then that's up to them but there's no room for sentiment in business and poor service providers are going to get called out. And can anybody explain why the 65 changeover point cannot be moved to Richmond as has been suggested on here several times? It seems such an obvious way to improve the service.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Sept 25, 2024 21:10:18 GMT
BCE47130 involved in an accident this afternoon on Kenton Road
|
|
exbox
Conductor
Posts: 130
|
Post by exbox on Sept 25, 2024 21:16:25 GMT
Changing the 65's relief point fully to Richmond would hopefully even out the curtailments so the Ealing end doesn't always get shafted. The facilities are there so I'm not sure why this couldn't happen. I can only presume there is 1 or more underlying factors that we are all missing as I can't believe an operator, particularly one in London, would do something to go against this if it's going to solve some of the issues? The problems with introducing live changeovers could be (and I’m speaking generally rather than this particular instance) lack of travel opportunities to the relief point meaning that ferry cars need to be used and ££££. Secondly no suitable relief facilities (a stroppy TU could make or break this) Thirdly no suitable stand space to park late meal relief buses (this might be the reason for the 65). Finally there might be a duty cost in increased travel time to the relief point meaning that it would negate any savings. But from a purely service control point of view, having a live relief point midway is just about ideal and it would transform the 65’s performance. There aren’t really any downsides to it.
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Sept 25, 2024 21:19:00 GMT
BCE47130 involved in an accident this afternoon on Kenton Road The third BCE from Sovereign in an accident now.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Sept 25, 2024 21:19:53 GMT
I'm sorry, but I can tell you from my own experience of using many different RATP routes very regularly, alongside what I have heard from people both in real life and on this forum, that this "bias" towards RATP that you claim is a thing just does not exist, and they are genuinely just a very poor operator who get a deserved amount of complaints. If you had to cope with using RATP routes daily then you would understand, but with the way you constantly defend them in your posts, it is very very clear you are not a regular user of any RATP route. i regularly commute on the K routes, and imo RATP run them pretty well. the only thing i've noticed recently is the K3 being turned at Claygate but that's probably to do in part with kingston council deciding to lay a new set of roadworks every two weeks. as mentioned before the 65 is a hard route to run, especially compared to other routes at FW like the 71 and 281.
obviously this is only really representative of TV and a bit of FW but over the past few months, i've noticed overall improvements in terms of punctuality and turns.
I agree there has definitely been an improvement on some routes in the last year or so, but there is still a long way to go for RATP. I would say the 281 is just as difficult as the 65 to operate, and RATP are equally as poor on it, but there is less uproar when they turn the whole 281 service at Kingston/Surbiton because alternative services are available, compared to when the entire 65 service gets turned at Brentford which effectively leaves the passengers stranded (the E1 extension would seriously help here). I will say I have noticed way less curtailments on the 281 in the last few months though, when in the past you were lucky to get a 281 going to Tolworth for hours. One of the other problems with the routes in Kingston specifically (both RATP or not) is that pretty much all of them need frequency increases, but instead TfL think cutting the frequencies is the way to go. I would say the 57, 85, 213, 281, 406/418, 411 off-peak, K2, K3 and SL7 are all desperate for an increase.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Sept 25, 2024 21:54:35 GMT
Repeating and treating other’s experiences as gospel doesn’t mean you have all knowledge over the subject. It makes you ignorant. I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly. Most of the members who comment negatively regarding RATP's performance are locals as you say or those who frequently rely on their routes. Locals themselves who quite often doesn't really consider what operator it is or whatsoever, but will only point out once a negative service is arising. You don't see those in Southeast London complaining about Go Ahead or Stagecoach. Rather it's aimed instead on external factors on the lines of roadworks, congestion etc. The statements from this can very much tell those two operators are operating at point most of the time without any mess ups. So why are there still complaints of certain routes in North West and West London if those areas are much known for harh traffic conditions? Why aren't people instead complaining about Transport UK or Metroline routes instead of RATP? It's to put it simply, they know at least how to handle scenarios of service disruption (mostly). Do you see complaints of the 260, 182, 140, 251, 237? Not really that much despite there hard conditions operating. They still reach the service on point unlike some of their counterparts, looking at you SL9, 183, 266, 226 etc. Looking at RATP the handling of situations involve just them pulling it's hair off either by leaving long gaps, abounding sections in particular where users are left without a service as well as stupidly long driver changeovers. I won't forget as many here in the reports of 142 services constantly blocking Edgware bus station for a single changeover. Unfortunately until such improvement comes (which I doubt there will be looking at the state from this company) there will continue to be comments on the negativity with RATP. If such improvement happens, I can guarantee these comments including from myself will slow down. I do find it quite bizarre at the same time for people trying to defend this company seems to either not live anywhere near an RATP route or is very stuck up in their head trying to justify their position on doing such so. On the other hand, I'm very baffling to my self on how did RATP make the service on the 13 worse than it's days at Tower Transit or even X services in general. I wonder?
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Sept 25, 2024 21:58:10 GMT
I can only presume there is 1 or more underlying factors that we are all missing as I can't believe an operator, particularly one in London, would do something to go against this if it's going to solve some of the issues? The problems with introducing live changeovers could be (and I’m speaking generally rather than this particular instance) lack of travel opportunities to the relief point meaning that ferry cars need to be used and ££££. Secondly no suitable relief facilities (a stroppy TU could make or break this) Thirdly no suitable stand space to park late meal relief buses (this might be the reason for the 65). Finally there might be a duty cost in increased travel time to the relief point meaning that it would negate any savings. But from a purely service control point of view, having a live relief point midway is just about ideal and it would transform the 65’s performance. There aren’t really any downsides to it. There are driver facilities at Richmond Bus Station. I am not certain (would appreciate a correction) but I believe there is a mess room and a toilet.
|
|
|
Post by bmck on Sept 25, 2024 23:22:28 GMT
I think even the most casual observer here would see how biased the forum can be towards RATP. Even when they are improving that gets glossed over quickly. Most of the members who comment negatively regarding RATP's performance are locals as you say or those who frequently rely on their routes. Locals themselves who quite often doesn't really consider what operator it is or whatsoever, but will only point out once a negative service is arising. You don't see those in Southeast London complaining about Go Ahead or Stagecoach. Rather it's aimed instead on external factors on the lines of roadworks, congestion etc. The statements from this can very much tell those two operators are operating at point most of the time without any mess ups. So why are there still complaints of certain routes in North West and West London if those areas are much known for harh traffic conditions? Why aren't people instead complaining about Transport UK or Metroline routes instead of RATP? It's to put it simply, they know at least how to handle scenarios of service disruption (mostly). Do you see complaints of the 260, 182, 140, 251, 237? Not really that much despite there hard conditions operating. They still reach the service on point unlike some of their counterparts, looking at you SL9, 183, 266, 226 etc. Looking at RATP the handling of situations involve just them pulling it's hair off either by leaving long gaps, abounding sections in particular where users are left without a service as well as stupidly long driver changeovers. I won't forget as many here in the reports of 142 services constantly blocking Edgware bus station for a single changeover. Unfortunately until such improvement comes (which I doubt there will be looking at the state from this company) there will continue to be comments on the negativity with RATP. If such improvement happens, I can guarantee these comments including from myself will slow down. I do find it quite bizarre at the same time for people trying to defend this company seems to either not live anywhere near an RATP route or is very stuck up in their head trying to justify their position on doing such so. On the other hand, I'm very baffling to my self on how did RATP make the service on the 13 worse than it's days at Tower Transit or even X services in general. I wonder? Hope you have got your breathe back after that. I sometimes drive the 102 through Golders Green and the congestion caused by lazy 13 changeovers is hellish. Why are they allowed to block the bridge like this? How are they allowed to do it?
|
|