|
|
Post by paulo on Nov 11, 2024 17:13:30 GMT
I really don't think it will end up at S or any other garage for that matter, it only takes up the space previously occupied by the 28. There's still the space from the 414 to use up, plus any from the 452. And of course X hasn't been at capacity for donkey's years, probably was last at capacity when AS opened. I do wonder if the 218 will stay at X when it moves over as it does seem to have been bouncing back and forth from X to V over the past 2 ish years. The 224 could theoretically move into V as it and the 218 have a similar PVR, it would just be quite a deadrun to Alperton / St Raphael’s but V isn’t far from the A406 so maybe that could be a possibility seeing as I imagine V will be fairly empty only having the 272, 283, 440 and E3 by the new year. If RATP accept that the more ‘slimmed down’ operation they now have is the way forward with presumably a chance it could make an operational profit, is there much to stop both AV and RP closing? The former has long been a site targeted by housing developers so that would theoretically see off the challenge of a TUK or Metroline acquiring the site. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 11, 2024 17:27:54 GMT
I do wonder if the 218 will stay at X when it moves over as it does seem to have been bouncing back and forth from X to V over the past 2 ish years. The 224 could theoretically move into V as it and the 218 have a similar PVR, it would just be quite a deadrun to Alperton / St Raphael’s but V isn’t far from the A406 so maybe that could be a possibility seeing as I imagine V will be fairly empty only having the 272, 283, 440 and E3 by the new year. If RATP accept that the more ‘slimmed down’ operation they now have is the way forward with presumably a chance it could make an operational profit, is there much to stop both AV and RP closing? The former has long been a site targeted by housing developers so that would theoretically see off the challenge of a TUK or Metroline acquiring the site. I think RATP would be foolish to let AV go. Whilst there may be limited opportunities right now we all know this industry is cyclical. RATP don’t really have a lot of choice for RP, now that HS2 is full steam ahead to Euston it will be even more important in the redevelopment of the surrounding area. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Nov 11, 2024 18:38:42 GMT
If RATP accept that the more ‘slimmed down’ operation they now have is the way forward with presumably a chance it could make an operational profit, is there much to stop both AV and RP closing? The former has long been a site targeted by housing developers so that would theoretically see off the challenge of a TUK or Metroline acquiring the site. I think RATP would be foolish to let AV go. Whilst there may be limited opportunities right now we all know this industry is cyclical. RATP don’t really have a lot of choice for RP, now that HS2 is full steam ahead to Euston it will be even more important in the redevelopment of the surrounding area. Even if RP closing is inevitable due to redevelopments, RATP would still have the decision of whether or not to look for a replacement site, to maintain their presence in the Wembley/Harlesden area. RATP don't have that many routes left in this area - the 18/220 could easily fit at other garages, and they could lose the 224 when the tender result is announced (or might not even bid). However, Metroline's nearby garages are now close to full capacity, so there may be opportunities to win more routes in the future if RATP were to acquire a new garage in the area. Similarly in the Hounslow area, AH/SG and TF/DH/GW have limited space left. But I do still wonder if RATP are considering closing AV - with the decision to electrify WK instead for the 235, and not bidding for some routes like the 120/222. They do have the capacity to fit the remaining AV routes across WK/FW/V, and there aren't many routes to potentially gain in the area. Could depend on some tender results like the 285/493/H25. Also worth pointing out that RATP chose not to electrify V for the 218 retention, despite it being better located for the route compared to X. If either RP or AV were to close, Stamford Brook would be important in reallocating routes. And surely the 218 would have been a good opportunity to get V wired up, to potentially take on more electric contracts in the future? There is now a lot of excess capacity across their Inner London garages, partly due to route losses with garages like AH and QB winning some RATP routes, and partly due to general PVR decreases and cuts to Central London routes. V for example previously ran the 9/10/27, all with higher PVRs. Plus more recently taking over Westbourne Park, which is one of the largest TFL garages but has been at about half capacity now and under Tower Transit. Partly as TT failed to retain some routes due to costly First contracts (similar situation at other operators like NP too), and partly again due to Central London cuts - such as the 23 now having a much smaller PVR, and the 414 likely to be withdrawn. Considering all of this, any garage closure elsewhere in RATP could help fill some of this excess capacity - but if there are no plans to do so, I would question if V should remain open. |
|
|
|
Post by cardinal on Nov 11, 2024 20:17:48 GMT
It may be that the French still want to divest of the London operation. If that’s the case, would it be more or less attractive if all the current property portfolio remains ?
TUK I’m sure would love to have V for example as that would free up space at QB.
However I did read the London business has returned a small profit based on better contract prices.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Nov 11, 2024 20:28:26 GMT
I really don't think it will end up at S or any other garage for that matter, it only takes up the space previously occupied by the 28. There's still the space from the 414 to use up, plus any from the 452. And of course X hasn't been at capacity for donkey's years, probably was last at capacity when AS opened. I do wonder if the 218 will stay at X when it moves over as it does seem to have been bouncing back and forth from X to V over the past 2 ish years. The 224 could theoretically move into V as it and the 218 have a similar PVR, it would just be quite a deadrun to Alperton / St Raphael’s but V isn’t far from the A406 so maybe that could be a possibility seeing as I imagine V will be fairly empty only having the 272, 283, 440 and E3 by the new year. I reckon the 218 is moving to X to free up some space for the 220 (and potentially the 110) to move into V, seeing as RP is closing and the future of AV is uncertain. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Nov 11, 2024 20:35:42 GMT
As the 414 tender expires on the 13/11 I wonder if there was an agreed extension period or just rolling until the consultation is published.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 11, 2024 20:49:25 GMT
As the 414 tender expires on the 13/11 I wonder if there was an agreed extension period or just rolling until the consultation is published. I would hazard I guess and say it will probably be extended till the same day as the 45/118 potential changes. Similar to how the 16/332/11/26 etc all happened on the same day. |
|
|
|
Post by paulo on Nov 11, 2024 21:51:43 GMT
It may be that the French still want to divest of the London operation. If that’s the case, would it be more or less attractive if all the current property portfolio remains ? TUK I’m sure would love to have V for example as that would free up space at QB. However I did read the London business has returned a small profit based on better contract prices. I think TUK have other challenges at present from the rail division with contracts going back into government control so it may be they don’t have the funding to do so at present. In their ideal world I suspect TUK want to take London United and perhaps Transit and Sovereign too. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 11, 2024 22:36:19 GMT
I do wonder if the 218 will stay at X when it moves over as it does seem to have been bouncing back and forth from X to V over the past 2 ish years. The 224 could theoretically move into V as it and the 218 have a similar PVR, it would just be quite a deadrun to Alperton / St Raphael’s but V isn’t far from the A406 so maybe that could be a possibility seeing as I imagine V will be fairly empty only having the 272, 283, 440 and E3 by the new year. I reckon the 218 is moving to X to free up some space for the 220 (and potentially the 110) to move into V, seeing as RP is closing and the future of AV is uncertain. Why is the future of AV uncertain? Have I missed something new that's come to light regarding AV? |
|
|
|
Post by SK02XHP (DPS30639) on Nov 11, 2024 22:37:30 GMT
I do wonder if the 218 will stay at X when it moves over as it does seem to have been bouncing back and forth from X to V over the past 2 ish years. The 224 could theoretically move into V as it and the 218 have a similar PVR, it would just be quite a deadrun to Alperton / St Raphael’s but V isn’t far from the A406 so maybe that could be a possibility seeing as I imagine V will be fairly empty only having the 272, 283, 440 and E3 by the new year. I reckon the 218 is moving to X to free up some space for the 220 (and potentially the 110) to move into V, seeing as RP is closing and the future of AV is uncertain. I think the 110 would be a good contender for taking up space at V once the 218 leaves. So far the on the single deck front V has DLE30316-26(283 batch) / DLE30339-47(272 batch) /DME30361-72(440 batch) and DE20116 and DLE30140/141 as spares. Noticed too that DE20108 has moved over to V to in the last few days. I'm guessing DE20094/5 and DE20150-6 will move back to X as a stop gap. |
|
|
|
Post by SK02XHP (DPS30639) on Nov 11, 2024 22:46:07 GMT
I think RATP would be foolish to let AV go. Whilst there may be limited opportunities right now we all know this industry is cyclical. RATP don’t really have a lot of choice for RP, now that HS2 is full steam ahead to Euston it will be even more important in the redevelopment of the surrounding area. Even if RP closing is inevitable due to redevelopments, RATP would still have the decision of whether or not to look for a replacement site, to maintain their presence in the Wembley/Harlesden area. RATP don't have that many routes left in this area - the 18/220 could easily fit at other garages, and they could lose the 224 when the tender result is announced (or might not even bid). However, Metroline's nearby garages are now close to full capacity, so there may be opportunities to win more routes in the future if RATP were to acquire a new garage in the area. Similarly in the Hounslow area, AH/SG and TF/DH/GW have limited space left. But I do still wonder if RATP are considering closing AV - with the decision to electrify WK instead for the 235, and not bidding for some routes like the 120/222. They do have the capacity to fit the remaining AV routes across WK/FW/V, and there aren't many routes to potentially gain in the area. Could depend on some tender results like the 285/493/H25. Also worth pointing out that RATP chose not to electrify V for the 218 retention, despite it being better located for the route compared to X. If either RP or AV were to close, Stamford Brook would be important in reallocating routes. And surely the 218 would have been a good opportunity to get V wired up, to potentially take on more electric contracts in the future? There is now a lot of excess capacity across their Inner London garages, partly due to route losses with garages like AH and QB winning some RATP routes, and partly due to general PVR decreases and cuts to Central London routes. V for example previously ran the 9/10/27, all with higher PVRs. Plus more recently taking over Westbourne Park, which is one of the largest TFL garages but has been at about half capacity now and under Tower Transit. Partly as TT failed to retain some routes due to costly First contracts (similar situation at other operators like NP too), and partly again due to Central London cuts - such as the 23 now having a much smaller PVR, and the 414 likely to be withdrawn. Considering all of this, any garage closure elsewhere in RATP could help fill some of this excess capacity - but if there are no plans to do so, I would question if V should remain open. Take Stamford Brook Garage 10 years ago for example when there was the high frequency routes as you say the 9, 10 and 27 as well as the newly acquired E3 back that seemingly required the 391 to move to Fulwell and the 419 to move to Shepherd's Bush because they were out of room. |
|
|
|
Post by randomy on Nov 12, 2024 16:32:10 GMT
I do wonder if the 218 will stay at X when it moves over as it does seem to have been bouncing back and forth from X to V over the past 2 ish years. The 224 could theoretically move into V as it and the 218 have a similar PVR, it would just be quite a deadrun to Alperton / St Raphael’s but V isn’t far from the A406 so maybe that could be a possibility seeing as I imagine V will be fairly empty only having the 272, 283, 440 and E3 by the new year. I reckon the 218 is moving to X to free up some space for the 220 (and potentially the 110) to move into V, seeing as RP is closing and the future of AV is uncertain. Isn't it possible for the 220 to go to JE? |
|
jake
Conductor
Posts: 63
|
Post by jake on Nov 12, 2024 17:20:54 GMT
I reckon the 218 is moving to X to free up some space for the 220 (and potentially the 110) to move into V, seeing as RP is closing and the future of AV is uncertain. I think the 110 would be a good contender for taking up space at V once the 218 leaves. So far the on the single deck front V has DLE30316-26(283 batch) / DLE30339-47(272 batch) /DME30361-72(440 batch) and DE20116 and DLE30140/141 as spares. Noticed too that DE20108 has moved over to V to in the last few days. I'm guessing DE20094/5 and DE20150-6 will move back to X as a stop gap. is the 272 not operated from S? |
|
jake
Conductor
Posts: 63
|
Post by jake on Nov 12, 2024 17:30:15 GMT
RATP have lost quite a few routes since their high in about 2017. Since RP is leased it would be more economical to spread the routes elsewhere? It is pretty much clear that X and V are pretty much empty and WJ being directly opposite RP means competition is high and routes are always changing hands (18, 223,224,226,228). I do also understand that everything fluctuates in this industry; possibly in a couple of years RATP garages may be at full capacity and losing RP would've been annoying to say the least.
Also, with HS2 will RATP eventually have to close RP anyway?
|
|
|
|
Post by JUNIOR26 on Nov 12, 2024 17:33:24 GMT
I think the 110 would be a good contender for taking up space at V once the 218 leaves. So far the on the single deck front V has DLE30316-26(283 batch) / DLE30339-47(272 batch) /DME30361-72(440 batch) and DE20116 and DLE30140/141 as spares. Noticed too that DE20108 has moved over to V to in the last few days. I'm guessing DE20094/5 and DE20150-6 will move back to X as a stop gap. is the 272 not operated from S? No its operated from V. |
|
