|
|
Post by Swadbus on Sept 20, 2012 13:07:37 GMT
From RouteOne magazine.
In line with the Mayor Boris Johnson’s election promise, this morning (Thursday) the Transport for London Board approved a production order for 600 New Bus for London (NBfL) vehicles (aka Borismaster), to built by Wrightbus.
This will represent the largest order of hybrid buses in Europe and a 200% increase in the current London hybrid bus fleet, which is set to grow by a further other 180 vehicles already on order.
When the final NBfL batch is delivered in 2016 more than 1,000 hybrids buses will be in London. It follows the delivery of eight NBfL prototypes this year, with an option for Wrightbus to build the first 1,000 of the design, which is owned by TfL.
The first batch of 30 buses, enough to convert a full (currently unspecified) route, will enter service in April 2013. Another route could be converted by August.
In total around 93 new buses will be delivered to TfL in 2013. Approximately 200 vehicles will be delivered in 2014, 250 in 2015 with the remainder in 2016.
TfL is buying the buses directly and allocating them to contracted operators. The operational life of the NBfL is 14 years London service.
The TfL Business Plan is due to be revised later this year and the purchase of the 600 vehicles will be delivered within TfL’s current funding settlement.
|
|
|
|
Post by londonbusboy on Sept 20, 2012 13:19:04 GMT
so Hybrids will spend more than 10 years in London?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2012 13:47:30 GMT
Fantastic news, finally more investment by TfL and may lower the cost of franchising considerably.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2012 13:50:55 GMT
Well this is good news that the hop on and hop off artistic buses are coming to London.
The bad news is that £160 million is coming from taxpayers because the sub contractors do not want to buy them.
If it was Ken Livingstone doing the meeting, there will be no 600 buses and the £160 million used on other projects.
|
|
|
|
Post by westhamgeezer on Sept 20, 2012 14:18:24 GMT
Love the bus, the build quality is excellent and aesthetically pleasing. However, the open boarding/conductor not checking fares will mean high evasion levels (one of the reasons for getting rid of the bendies) and (indirectly) add to the operational costs of the bus. If the operational concept of the bus was changed, then I believe the vehicle will be a success. I hope that it is.
|
|
|
|
Post by moz on Sept 20, 2012 17:50:12 GMT
Personally I can't see this decision going without a challenge from the other manufacturers. I can also see operators getting into a huff about the order too as they may well find themselves losing routes with lower bids and generic vehicles as opposed to TfL NB4Ls at higher cost. The current Virgin v DfT court case will be interesting to see as if Virgin pull off a coup win (Doubtful) then that would open the door to ANY company that loses an operating contract through tendering. Interesting times ahead....
Moz
|
|
|
|
Post by RM5chris on Sept 20, 2012 18:05:32 GMT
Personally I can't see this decision going without a challenge from the other manufacturers. I can also see operators getting into a huff about the order too as they may well find themselves losing routes with lower bids and generic vehicles as opposed to TfL NB4Ls at higher cost. The current Virgin v DfT court case will be interesting to see as if Virgin pull off a coup win (Doubtful) then that would open the door to ANY company that loses an operating contract through tendering. Interesting times ahead.... Moz I suppose we shall have to see how it all pans out.... Surely however it would be possible after the first batch are made to have more built but featuring, say Volvo hybrid power units etc? Over LT history you can find similar buses (the RT family) that have different chassis/engines and bodybuilders through to the RM (AEC and Leyland units when new) and the DMS (Leyland or Gardner engines and different bodybuilders). So it could happen......(although I think unlikely). |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 20, 2012 18:20:12 GMT
Fantastic news, finally more investment by TfL and may lower the cost of franchising considerably. How is it going to lower the cost of route contracts (not franchises as under a franchise the operator retains the revenue)? |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 20, 2012 18:42:29 GMT
Personally I can't see this decision going without a challenge from the other manufacturers. I can also see operators getting into a huff about the order too as they may well find themselves losing routes with lower bids and generic vehicles as opposed to TfL NB4Ls at higher cost. The current Virgin v DfT court case will be interesting to see as if Virgin pull off a coup win (Doubtful) then that would open the door to ANY company that loses an operating contract through tendering. Interesting times ahead.... Moz I don't see that there will be a challenge. An interesting fact in the TfL Board Paper is that the procurement competition that TfL ran was for design, prototypes and the supply of up to 1,000 vehicles. The 1,000 vehicles was the bit that surprised me. On this basis other manufacturers have no basis for a challenge as they had the opportunity to bid - some did, others did not. Wrightbus won. I am afraid I do not think the Virgin judicial review offers any sort of parallel. The allegation is that the DfT did not follow its own processes but I have yet to hear a cogent explanation from anyone at Virgin as to what that means and I have sat through the parliamentary webcasts! TfL can specify what it likes in terms of vehicles and the precedent of mandating and supplying the vehicle is already established for the Routemaster operated Heritage routes. I would expect all operators bidding competitively for a NB4L operated route would have the same notional lease charge (as set by TfL) and also the same level of Wright delivered maintenance work. The variables therefore are scheduling efficiency, crew costs and how depot location affects dead mileage costs. It will be for TfL to decide if it wants a traditional vehicle bid alongside NB4L - no different to how it approached bendy bus conversion although operators could choose what bendy bus to buy and how to procure the maintenance. AFAIK there were some route tenders where bendy bus costs were sought but the decision was taken not to convert - route 243 for example. The difference now is that Boris has laid down a target number of buses which will have to be achieved at all costs or else he will be accused of failure. He can't exceed 600 buses because there is not enough time to manufacture them. The difference under Ken was that he said "increase the capacity and improve the bus network" and left it to TfL to get on with it. There is no such requirement from Boris and he has already broken his own manifesto commitment to not cut any TfL bus routes. I agree life will be interesting but I don't see that TfL would have gone down this road without being confident that the existing route tendering process and contract structure could cope with the NB4Ls. The Virgin case is just the worst case of sour grapes I have ever seen - they lost to First. They should put up and shut up rather than forcing taxpayers cash to be forked out on legal fees on a pointless legal challenge. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2012 20:58:08 GMT
Fantastic news, finally more investment by TfL and may lower the cost of franchising considerably. How is it going to lower the cost of route contracts (not franchises as under a franchise the operator retains the revenue)? The prices of new buses being purchased/value of existing buses being factored in will not exist on NB4L routes as the buses will simply be 'posted out'. |
|
|
|
Post by andrewp on Sept 20, 2012 21:36:37 GMT
The unique nature of the design means that a challenge is not going to happen - the ground are clear and the prototypes were the final stage of comptition.
Rather than Virgin trains as the OJEU challenge (rumour has it Richard Branson's train set is now on e-bay with slight damage from being thrown out of a pram with other toys but no one else was allowed to play with it) its Mears vs. Leeds City Council that changed the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 20, 2012 22:28:27 GMT
Awful decision by TfL, wasting money on buses that simply aren't needed & look hideous. The current selection of new vehicles being introduced into London does the same job as the Borismaster & much more cheaply too. As I've mentioned before, the money would be better invested in extending & creating new route that far outweigh the need for a stupid vehicle like the Borismaster. I also do not understand how they will do 14 years when buses now seem to be moved on between 10-12 years but yet could do a job right up to 15-16 years.
'westhamgeezer' - the build quality is shoddy as LT1 has some panels inside the bus coming loose already.
'freebbc' - if it was Ken Livingstone, the money would be stashed under his bed ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Volvo on Sept 20, 2012 22:49:57 GMT
^^this, i would like infinity times if were possible. I dont know how something can have great great B. Q when the air con doesnt work properly on not one but a few vehicles.
|
|
|
|
Post by moz on Sept 21, 2012 1:35:28 GMT
The unique nature of the design means that a challenge is not going to happen - the ground are clear and the prototypes were the final stage of comptition. Rather than Virgin trains as the OJEU challenge (rumour has it Richard Branson's train set is now on e-bay with slight damage from being thrown out of a pram with other toys but no one else was allowed to play with it) its Mears vs. Leeds City Council that changed the game. Now this is interesting and many thanks for bringing it to light here. It seems then that our Mr Branson may well win on certain points but not others and end up costing everybody a lot of money. It also shows what ridiculous legal challenges can be made in a country without a Basic Law Constitution, but that's way off topic! Moz |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2012 6:34:15 GMT
Personally I can't see this decision going without a challenge from the other manufacturers. I can also see operators getting into a huff about the order too as they may well find themselves losing routes with lower bids and generic vehicles as opposed to TfL NB4Ls at higher cost. The current Virgin v DfT court case will be interesting to see as if Virgin pull off a coup win (Doubtful) then that would open the door to ANY company that loses an operating contract through tendering. Interesting times ahead.... Moz They can't challenge it ... it was an open tender to design and exclusive rights to build the 1st 1000 ... the ink has long since dried on that contract. TfL would be in breach of contract if any of the 1st 1000 production NBfL are awarded to any company other than Wrights ... surely this must mean that the plan was for TfL to own them all the time?  Suppose TfL could have stipulated model and manufacturer as vehicle specs in tender invitation. The WC contract has yet to be signed |
|
Suppose TfL could have stipulated model and manufacturer as vehicle specs in tender invitation.