RATP London

[VMH2537]

RATP has once again decided to aboundon all 125 services east of Southgate as I'm currently writing this, resulting in an one hour gap. Whilst there are roadworks at Southgate, this doesn't mean users have to be left without a service because a garage is on the 'other side of the route'.

Edit: The gaps now 90 minutes.

[ADH45258]

Nov 17, 2024 14:00:52 GMT VMH2537 said:

RATP has once again decided to aboundon all 125 services east of Southgate as I'm currently writing this, resulting in an one hour gap. Whilst there are roadworks at Southgate, this doesn't mean users have to be left without a service because a garage is on the 'other side of the route'.

Edit: The gaps now 90 minutes.

Is this entirely down to the operator (and did Metroline manage better with PB being nearer the other end of the route) - or is the 125 perhaps too long now with the extension to Colindale?

If stand space could be found, maybe the 125 could be cut back to Southgate, and a new route introduced from Barnet to Winchmore Hill? This would also create a direct Barnet-Southgate link.

If not, some other changes in the Southgate area could free up some space - for example withdraw the 299, extend the W9 to Arnos Grove, reroute the 298 to Muswell Hill and extend the W6 to Cockfosters?

[DT 11]

Nov 17, 2024 14:00:52 GMT VMH2537 said:

RATP has once again decided to aboundon all 125 services east of Southgate as I'm currently writing this, resulting in an one hour gap. Whilst there are roadworks at Southgate, this doesn't mean users have to be left without a service because a garage is on the 'other side of the route'.

Edit: The gaps now 90 minutes.

That is the 30% rule in full force pretty much hardly shocking these days because temporary traffic lights spawn like Chess pieces turn up anywhere and no checkmate for a long period while no work is actually being done…

[VMH2537]

Nov 17, 2024 14:37:30 GMT ADH45258 said:

Nov 17, 2024 14:00:52 GMT VMH2537 said:

RATP has once again decided to aboundon all 125 services east of Southgate as I'm currently writing this, resulting in an one hour gap. Whilst there are roadworks at Southgate, this doesn't mean users have to be left without a service because a garage is on the 'other side of the route'.

Edit: The gaps now 90 minutes.

Is this entirely down to the operator (and did Metroline manage better with PB being nearer the other end of the route) - or is the 125 perhaps too long now with the extension to Colindale?

If stand space could be found, maybe the 125 could be cut back to Southgate, and a new route introduced from Barnet to Winchmore Hill? This would also create a direct Barnet-Southgate link.

If not, some other changes in the Southgate area could free up some space - for example withdraw the 299, extend the W9 to Arnos Grove, reroute the 298 to Muswell Hill and extend the W6 to Cockfosters?

The operation under Metroline was a much better experience pre-2021 even with the Colindale extension. All the route needs is an improved controlled operator with not even a '30% rule' being enforced as what I've seen today.

[atb123]

Nov 17, 2024 14:37:30 GMT ADH45258 said:

Nov 17, 2024 14:00:52 GMT VMH2537 said:

RATP has once again decided to aboundon all 125 services east of Southgate as I'm currently writing this, resulting in an one hour gap. Whilst there are roadworks at Southgate, this doesn't mean users have to be left without a service because a garage is on the 'other side of the route'.

Edit: The gaps now 90 minutes.

Is this entirely down to the operator (and did Metroline manage better with PB being nearer the other end of the route) - or is the 125 perhaps too long now with the extension to Colindale?

If stand space could be found, maybe the 125 could be cut back to Southgate, and a new route introduced from Barnet to Winchmore Hill? This would also create a direct Barnet-Southgate link.

If not, some other changes in the Southgate area could free up some space - for example withdraw the 299, extend the W9 to Arnos Grove, reroute the 298 to Muswell Hill and extend the W6 to Cockfosters?

The W6 extension would be a sick idea

[jake]

would LT's not better suit the 18? One of the problems with the route is people not using the upper deck and causing overcrowding but surely two staircases would help? Not including the fact that LT's are longer (not sure if they have more space than the VH's). Plus there are three doors so people can more easily get off.


In general is there any plan for TfL to electrify at least some LT's, there was one that was converted and mention that it would be significantly cheaper for TfL then to purchase completely new buses? Plus the iconic bodywork.

[barrypotter]

Nov 17, 2024 14:00:52 GMT VMH2537 said:

RATP has once again decided to aboundon all 125 services east of Southgate as I'm currently writing this, resulting in an one hour gap. Whilst there are roadworks at Southgate, this doesn't mean users have to be left without a service because a garage is on the 'other side of the route'.

Edit: The gaps now 90 minutes.

On Friday at 1440, there were 4 125s curtailed to, and blocking Southgate Bus Station, and another had just left.

[vjaska]

Nov 17, 2024 16:34:13 GMT jake said:

would LT's not better suit the 18? One of the problems with the route is people not using the upper deck and causing overcrowding but surely two staircases would help? Not including the fact that LT's are longer (not sure if they have more space than the VH's). Plus there are three doors so people can more easily get off.


In general is there any plan for TfL to electrify at least some LT's, there was one that was converted and mention that it would be significantly cheaper for TfL then to purchase completely new buses? Plus the iconic bodywork.

The capacity of a LT isn't much bigger than a conventional bus and they hold less seats too. Three door boarding was removed a number of years ago and whilst the two rear doors can be used to alight, you can only board through the front door so dwell times at the busy stops on LT routes have no doubt increased for boarding as a result. And despite all the money spent on them, they're still worse than almost all conventional buses during the hot weather.

LT11 was electrified and seems to spend more time out of service than in so on the face of it, it's looks a failure. Also, the cost of modifying a bus to electric power aren't necessarily cheaper than buying a new bus - it really all depends especially if your modified bus spends more time sitting in the garage than out on the road.

[mrhk]

Nov 17, 2024 18:55:45 GMT vjaska said:

Nov 17, 2024 16:34:13 GMT jake said:

would LT's not better suit the 18? One of the problems with the route is people not using the upper deck and causing overcrowding but surely two staircases would help? Not including the fact that LT's are longer (not sure if they have more space than the VH's). Plus there are three doors so people can more easily get off.


In general is there any plan for TfL to electrify at least some LT's, there was one that was converted and mention that it would be significantly cheaper for TfL then to purchase completely new buses? Plus the iconic bodywork.

The capacity of a LT isn't much bigger than a conventional bus and they hold less seats too. Three door boarding was removed a number of years ago and whilst the two rear doors can be used to alight, you can only board through the front door so dwell times at the busy stops on LT routes have no doubt increased for boarding as a result. And despite all the money spent on them, they're still worse than almost all conventional buses during the hot weather.

LT11 was electrified and seems to spend more time out of service than in so on the face of it, it's looks a failure. Also, the cost of modifying a bus to electric power aren't necessarily cheaper than buying a new bus - it really all depends especially if your modified bus spends more time sitting in the garage than out on the road.

Another factor is fare evasion, one of the reasons as to why the 18 was initially made DD again after the end of road for the Artics. This is (probably) the same reason why the 207 hasn't seen LT operation or strays; both routes are really popular and introudcing LTs on them could mean increased fare evasion.

[yunus]

Confused here, does RATP have 2 separate garages BT & CP? Going by LBR this is the case however on LVF the history lists all routes running from BT plus using same vehicles from routes listed between the two garages.

[DE20106]

Nov 17, 2024 20:29:25 GMT yunus said:

Confused here, does RATP have 2 separate garages BT & CP? Going by LBR this is the case however on LVF the history lists all routes running from BT plus using same vehicles from routes listed between the two garages.

CP is an outstation of BT, AFAIK the vehicles between the two are interchangeable. It’s essentially an overflow car park of BT

[yunus]

Nov 17, 2024 20:50:08 GMT DE20106 said:

Nov 17, 2024 20:29:25 GMT yunus said:

Confused here, does RATP have 2 separate garages BT & CP? Going by LBR this is the case however on LVF the history lists all routes running from BT plus using same vehicles from routes listed between the two garages.

CP is an outstation of BT, AFAIK the vehicles between the two are interchangeable. It’s essentially an overflow car park of BT

Ahhhh gotcha. I was a tad confused by looking on LVF, as it showed E200MMCs being on the 326 & H11 both from BT for example.

[astock5000]

Nov 17, 2024 18:55:45 GMT vjaska said:

Nov 17, 2024 16:34:13 GMT jake said:

would LT's not better suit the 18? One of the problems with the route is people not using the upper deck and causing overcrowding but surely two staircases would help? Not including the fact that LT's are longer (not sure if they have more space than the VH's). Plus there are three doors so people can more easily get off.


In general is there any plan for TfL to electrify at least some LT's, there was one that was converted and mention that it would be significantly cheaper for TfL then to purchase completely new buses? Plus the iconic bodywork.

The capacity of a LT isn't much bigger than a conventional bus and they hold less seats too. Three door boarding was removed a number of years ago and whilst the two rear doors can be used to alight, you can only board through the front door so dwell times at the busy stops on LT routes have no doubt increased for boarding as a result. And despite all the money spent on them, they're still worse than almost all conventional buses during the hot weather.

LT11 was electrified and seems to spend more time out of service than in so on the face of it, it's looks a failure. Also, the cost of modifying a bus to electric power aren't necessarily cheaper than buying a new bus - it really all depends especially if your modified bus spends more time sitting in the garage than out on the road.

The change to front boarding on LTs would indeed have increased dwell times at those stops where many people board, though LTs should still be much quicker than other types at places where large numbers are mainly alighting. Hard to say when there's a lot of both, though there may actually be better passenger flow through the bus now no one will normally be heading up the rear staircase. Seating capacity of an LT is 62 - the same as nearly all types of bodywork on B5LH chassis, four or five fewer than many MMCs and BYD / Cities but two more than a StreetDeck Electroliner, so all in all not much in it.

I believe LT11 was initially planned to be on a 6-month trial but operated for only around two to three, split into various spells over a 10-month period. It's hard to say how reliable it was without knowing whether it was used for any testing during those gaps in its use on the 390, or otherwise what the issues keeping it from running were (it did return to HT under its own power on 29th November last year and didn't appear again until 11th December, so not a major failure in that case at least).

Since then Wrightbus have stated their capability to convert LTs at their Newpower facility, while Equipmake have gone on to repower other buses including First York's Optare Versas (which were already EVs, but had their full drivetrains replaced) and Big Bus Company's Anhui Ankais. Obviously sightseeing buses don't have the year-round mileage of those on regular services, and neither do they show on tracking sites but those are at least a common sight in Central London, while First's Versas all appear to be in regular use looking on Bustimes. I wonder whether, as can sometimes be the case, since the trial of LT11 only involved one vehicle, perhaps there wasn't the momentum behind the project compared to a conversion of a larger fleet with fewer options to fall back on?

[i3lu]

Nov 17, 2024 14:59:32 GMT VMH2537 said:

Nov 17, 2024 14:37:30 GMT ADH45258 said:

Is this entirely down to the operator (and did Metroline manage better with PB being nearer the other end of the route) - or is the 125 perhaps too long now with the extension to Colindale?

If stand space could be found, maybe the 125 could be cut back to Southgate, and a new route introduced from Barnet to Winchmore Hill? This would also create a direct Barnet-Southgate link.

If not, some other changes in the Southgate area could free up some space - for example withdraw the 299, extend the W9 to Arnos Grove, reroute the 298 to Muswell Hill and extend the W6 to Cockfosters?

The operation under Metroline was a much better experience pre-2021 even with the Colindale extension. All the route needs is an improved controlled operator with not even a '30% rule' being enforced as what I've seen today.

That's true! The route was extended to Colindale on May 2019 and RATP took over long after, back in January 2022. I do not remember any complaints during Metroline's PB operation. The only problem on extension during Metroline era was the turning point in Hendon. In the beginning the 125 used to terminate at Hendon Church End and buses were turning back via A41 and Greyhound Hill. Afterwards the turning point was cut to Hendon The Quadrant with buses turning at Bell Lane. But the operation was brilliant comparing to RATP. 

[SK02XHP (DPS30639)]

Nov 17, 2024 20:29:25 GMT yunus said:

Confused here, does RATP have 2 separate garages BT & CP? Going by LBR this is the case however on LVF the history lists all routes running from BT plus using same vehicles from routes listed between the two garages.

Back in 2021 it was a similar situation with Wandsworth(JE) and Stamford Brook(V) as JE was an outstation of V so hence the 28 would sometimes be operated with 2016 reg VHs that were based out of Stamford Brook and the 2013 reg VHs based at Wandsworth would sometimes appear on the 9, 211, E3 and H91. So much so the schedule for the route even said some buses started from V rather then JE. And likewise LVF listed VH45101-123 as working all routes based out of V.