|
|
Post by kbuses on Nov 28, 2015 19:19:43 GMT
Ex DMS 1515(THM515M) supercar(front third DMS middle third tube train Back third networker train) seen leaving Hoddesdon town centre this evening.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2015 0:57:15 GMT
Ex DMS 1515(THM515M) supercar(front third DMS middle third tube train Back third networker train) seen leaving Hoddesdon town centre this evening. Now in the hands of the Epping Ongar Railway |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 15, 2015 16:35:57 GMT
PVL115 is at Ensignbus
|
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 20, 2015 18:44:08 GMT
Sadly it's now moved on and been scrapped.  She was intended for a hybrid project. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 12:49:42 GMT
Sadly it's now moved on and been scrapped. She was intended for a hybrid project. What a shame. Somehow I knew it would be that way. It really wasn't in good condition before its withdrawal. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 14:20:32 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 15:37:53 GMT
Sadly it's now moved on and been scrapped. She was intended for a hybrid project. What a shame. Somehow I knew it would be that way. It really wasn't in good condition before its withdrawal. What was the condition of PVL115 after it's accident? Are there any photos? It seems like this bus could have gone on a lot longer. Sad to see it go this way. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 17:24:34 GMT
What a shame. Somehow I knew it would be that way. It really wasn't in good condition before its withdrawal. What was the condition of PVL115 after it's accident? Are there any photos? It seems like this bus could have gone on a lot longer. Sad to see it go this way. It would have required some degree of work to get it to be DDA compliant which must be partly a factor |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 17:38:29 GMT
What a shame. Somehow I knew it would be that way. It really wasn't in good condition before its withdrawal. What was the condition of PVL115 after it's accident? Are there any photos? It seems like this bus could have gone on a lot longer. Sad to see it go this way. I've been looking, and I honestly can't find any photos of it after the accident. I'd have expected a photo of it at EnsignBus at least. When I mentioned that it wasn't in good condition, I meant before the accident. Mechanically it was good, even the exterior wasn't too bad. The interior however was pretty tired. The floor was dirty and being held down with screws and rivets in plenty of places. The high traffic areas were a bit corroded, a bit worn and dirty. The seat moquette was verging on getting up and walking away all by itself.  The plastic seats at the back were pretty disgusting too. It looked good in all the photos. You just had to see it in person. I want to say that this is an example of what happens when a bus is used heavily for a number of years and only refurbished once. Somehow I don't quite believe that to be true. Whenever you have a big fleet of anything, there's always a handful of whatever it is that just degrade uncontrollably to the point where they end up being disposed of. That being said, PVL115 had the potential to last another 15 years at least. The floor and seats could've been replaced. Of course anything can be cleaned. Corrosion can be removed. Bodywork can be repaired and repainted. Though, PVL115 could've had a damaged or rotten frame, for all I know. If trains and Routemasters can last 40+ years, then why can't a bus from 2000. I'd love to see how long the New Buses for London last until they're deemed worthless by TfL and junked. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2015 23:22:12 GMT
What was the condition of PVL115 after it's accident? Are there any photos? It seems like this bus could have gone on a lot longer. Sad to see it go this way. I've been looking, and I honestly can't find any photos of it after the accident. I'd have expected a photo of it at EnsignBus at least. When I mentioned that it wasn't in good condition, I meant before the accident. Mechanically it was good, even the exterior wasn't too bad. The interior however was pretty tired. The floor was dirty and being held down with screws and rivets in plenty of places. The high traffic areas were a bit corroded, a bit worn and dirty. The seat moquette was verging on getting up and walking away all by itself. The plastic seats at the back were pretty disgusting too. It looked good in all the photos. You just had to see it in person. I want to say that this is an example of what happens when a bus is used heavily for a number of years and only refurbished once. Somehow I don't quite believe that to be true. Whenever you have a big fleet of anything, there's always a handful of whatever it is that just degrade uncontrollably to the point where they end up being disposed of. That being said, PVL115 had the potential to last another 15 years at least. The floor and seats could've been replaced. Of course anything can be cleaned. Corrosion can be removed. Bodywork can be repaired and repainted. Though, PVL115 could've had a damaged or rotten frame, for all I know. If trains and Routemasters can last 40+ years, then why can't a bus from 2000. I'd love to see how long the New Buses for London last until they're deemed worthless by TfL and junked. Because Routemasters are a far better design than PVLs, and all the parts are designed to be easily replaced? The difference between the simplicity of a Routemaster and the complex electrics of a PVL is quite something. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Dec 22, 2015 10:50:20 GMT
PVL115 did well to make 15 years in London service. That's longer in London service than all AEC Swifts and Merlins, the vast majority of DMSs and nearly all Bristol LH BLs.
|
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 22, 2015 11:50:07 GMT
I've been looking, and I honestly can't find any photos of it after the accident. I'd have expected a photo of it at EnsignBus at least. When I mentioned that it wasn't in good condition, I meant before the accident. Mechanically it was good, even the exterior wasn't too bad. The interior however was pretty tired. The floor was dirty and being held down with screws and rivets in plenty of places. The high traffic areas were a bit corroded, a bit worn and dirty. The seat moquette was verging on getting up and walking away all by itself. The plastic seats at the back were pretty disgusting too. It looked good in all the photos. You just had to see it in person. I want to say that this is an example of what happens when a bus is used heavily for a number of years and only refurbished once. Somehow I don't quite believe that to be true. Whenever you have a big fleet of anything, there's always a handful of whatever it is that just degrade uncontrollably to the point where they end up being disposed of. That being said, PVL115 had the potential to last another 15 years at least. The floor and seats could've been replaced. Of course anything can be cleaned. Corrosion can be removed. Bodywork can be repaired and repainted. Though, PVL115 could've had a damaged or rotten frame, for all I know. If trains and Routemasters can last 40+ years, then why can't a bus from 2000. I'd love to see how long the New Buses for London last until they're deemed worthless by TfL and junked. Because Routemasters are a far better design than PVLs, and all the parts are designed to be easily replaced? The difference between the simplicity of a Routemaster and the complex electrics of a PVL is quite something. That reminds me of bus program on BBC2 (many moons ago) where a comparison was somewhat demonstrated regarding engine removal/installation on a Routemaster and a B20 DMS. I can't remember the time Factor but the Routemaster procedure was practically 1/2 the time it would take on the more modern bus. The brief illustration was based at Stockwell garage. |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Dec 22, 2015 13:58:42 GMT
Because Routemasters are a far better design than PVLs, and all the parts are designed to be easily replaced? The difference between the simplicity of a Routemaster and the complex electrics of a PVL is quite something. That reminds me of bus program on BBC2 (many moons ago) where a comparison was somewhat demonstrated regarding engine removal/installation on a Routemaster and a B20 DMS. I can't remember the time Factor but the Routemaster procedure was practically 1/4 the time it would take on the more modern bus. The brief illustration was based at Stockwell garage.
The RM could be done in a day. Seen a clip on You Tube, check the BBC web page you might see the whole documentary |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Dec 22, 2015 14:10:05 GMT
That reminds me of bus program on BBC2 (many moons ago) where a comparison was somewhat demonstrated regarding engine removal/installation on a Routemaster and a B20 DMS. I can't remember the time Factor but the Routemaster procedure was practically 1/4 the time it would take on the more modern bus. The brief illustration was based at Stockwell garage.
The RM could be done in a day. Seen a clip on You Tube, check the BBC web page you might see the whole documentary On You Tube it's "Perpetual Motion The Routemaster" full 30min documentary  |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 22, 2015 15:21:38 GMT
That reminds me of bus program on BBC2 (many moons ago) where a comparison was somewhat demonstrated regarding engine removal/installation on a Routemaster and a B20 DMS. I can't remember the time Factor but the Routemaster procedure was practically 1/4 the time it would take on the more modern bus. The brief illustration was based at Stockwell garage.
The RM could be done in a day. Seen a clip on You Tube, check the BBC web page you might see the whole documentary Wasn't even a whole day, was designed to be done between morning and evening peaks (the between peaks service was much less when this was planned in 1950s). The whole maintenance regime has changed, most garages no longer have complete spare engines that they can exchange. |
|
She was intended for a hybrid project.
The plastic seats at the back were pretty disgusting too. It looked good in all the photos. You just had to see it in person.
