|
Post by M1104 on Feb 12, 2021 14:16:03 GMT
Don't know if this is the right topic to post this in, but LT165 is currently on the 156. I hope TfL/Abellio are not getting any ideas regarding the new contract as i want daily 14/64 reg E40Hs for Wimbledon. ;D Having said that blinding¹ them up so would be practical for fleet flexibility. ¹ - eg. taken from withdrawn deckers
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Feb 17, 2021 18:37:20 GMT
Would route 29/N29 benefit from converting to a full LT fleet as the roads are wide enough to accommodate them aswell its a main Central London route?
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Feb 17, 2021 18:51:21 GMT
Would route 29/N29 benefit from converting to a full LT fleet as the roads are wide enough to accommodate them aswell its a main Central London route? Probably but the fact it got hybrids around the same time when the Routemasters came into service probably means we won’t see them.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Feb 17, 2021 19:09:12 GMT
The original routemasters lasted a lot longer! Very True! Was the LT designed for a 25 service life? I believe the original Routemaster had a design life of 17 years.....the rest is history. While 15 years design life for the LT can hardly be described as progress it isn't that far off the original Routemaster. Anyway LTs will be with us for a long time yet.....their diesels engines will be replaced with batteries to turn them into electric buses!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Feb 17, 2021 20:04:18 GMT
Very True! Was the LT designed for a 25 service life? I believe the original Routemaster had a design life of 17 years.....the rest is history. While 15 years design life for the LT can hardly be described as progress it isn't that far off the original Routemaster. Anyway LTs will be with us for a long time yet.....their diesels engines will be replaced with batteries to turn them into electric buses!!!!!! I can hear the groans of all the forum members who have grown sick of seeing the LT’s.
|
|
|
Post by greg on Feb 18, 2021 8:03:41 GMT
Would route 29/N29 benefit from converting to a full LT fleet as the roads are wide enough to accommodate them aswell its a main Central London route? The lower deck layout would be an issue for the 29 I believe, the standing room is quite limited and would surely cause an issue observationally speaking. I would say the same for routes like the 18 or 205 which get just as busy.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Feb 19, 2021 21:07:32 GMT
Would route 29/N29 benefit from converting to a full LT fleet as the roads are wide enough to accommodate them aswell its a main Central London route? The lower deck layout would be an issue for the 29 I believe, the standing room is quite limited and would surely cause an issue observationally speaking. I would say the same for routes like the 18 or 205 which get just as busy. Why is the 149 LT then?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 19, 2021 21:08:46 GMT
The lower deck layout would be an issue for the 29 I believe, the standing room is quite limited and would surely cause an issue observationally speaking. I would say the same for routes like the 18 or 205 which get just as busy. Why is the 149 LT then? Because TfL needed somewhere to dump them
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Feb 19, 2021 21:13:33 GMT
Because TfL needed somewhere to dump them Well, dump them on a lesser used DD route. Like the 467
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2021 21:18:00 GMT
Because TfL needed somewhere to dump them Well, dump them on a lesser used DD route. Like the 467 Maybe LTs will start being phased out? Not sure only my own idea.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 19, 2021 21:18:46 GMT
Because TfL needed somewhere to dump them Well, dump them on a lesser used DD route. Like the 467 The 467 has a PVR of 2 while the 149 has a PVR of 38, you do the maths there.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Feb 19, 2021 21:31:12 GMT
Well, dump them on a lesser used DD route. Like the 467 The 467 has a PVR of 2 while the 149 has a PVR of 38, you do the maths there. Not surprised TFL chose to put LTs in London's West End than the City mainly just for the tourists. I would dump the 149 LTs on West End Routes such as 14 or 29
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2021 22:15:43 GMT
The 467 has a PVR of 2 while the 149 has a PVR of 38, you do the maths there. Not surprised TFL chose to put LTs in London's West End than the City mainly just for the tourists. I would dump the 149 LTs on West End Routes such as 14 or 29 I wouldn't say they are mainly on West End routes you have routes like the 21,67,76,EL1,ELT2 and ELT 3 for example. If anything with PVR cuts we will see more and more push out to the suburbs like the the 313 recently. No LT fan but we stuck with them for sometime.
|
|
|
Post by greg on Feb 19, 2021 22:21:42 GMT
The lower deck layout would be an issue for the 29 I believe, the standing room is quite limited and would surely cause an issue observationally speaking. I would say the same for routes like the 18 or 205 which get just as busy. Why is the 149 LT then? I would say the 18 and 29 carry much heavier loads throughout the whole route/day than the 149 Also, routes like the 18 run alone most of the route so it would not be ideal to have limited standing space
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Feb 19, 2021 22:26:02 GMT
I would say the 18 and 29 carry much heavier loads throughout the whole route/day than the 149 Also, routes like the 18 run alone most of the route so it would not be ideal to have limited standing space Regrettably for some on here, it is very unfortunate that forum contributors will not have any say where LTs are allocated.
|
|