Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2014 11:33:32 GMT
Well the axe have officially come to one of the Routemaster routes where the 9H will be withdrawn and £1 Million will be saved and invested elsewhere. It mentions on Leon's article that the passengers are in favor of the NBFL then the Classical Routemaster. leondaniels.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/all-good-things-as-they-say-come-to-end.htmlI always wonder where the Routemasters for the 9H go to? All I can say is well done to TFL for reinstating the Routemasters on the 9H.  Edit: At the end of his article it mentions "The proposed change is subject to consultation and contractual arrangements" |
|
|
|
Post by sw11simon on Jan 23, 2014 12:08:11 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2014 12:20:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jan 23, 2014 12:34:07 GMT
As saddened as I am to hear that news, still subject to consultation, I can't say I am surprised considering TfL's budget situation connection with the NB4L.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jan 23, 2014 12:34:09 GMT
Both routes are currently in tranche 499 with contract expiry Nov 2015. Decision would need to be taken by Oct 2014 on whether to cancel the tender.
I could see the best of the 9H fleet being used on 15H. The tourist demand is seasonal up to a point, so its an expensive luxury in winter months. By Nov 2015 there will be 500+ NB4Ls so I think justifying 15H continuing will be hard especially if heavy overhauls are needed by then.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 23, 2014 12:43:50 GMT
Both routes are currently in tranche 499 with contract expiry Nov 2015. Decision would need to be taken by Oct 2014 on whether to cancel the tender. I could see the best of the 9H fleet being used on 15H. The tourist demand is seasonal up to a point, so its an expensive luxury in winter months. By Nov 2015 there will be 500+ NB4Ls so I think justifying 15H continuing will be hard. Pretty inevitable in the financial circumstances. The cost per km for the Heritage routes is very high so an obvious and easy target for reductions. I agree that the 15H must be on borrowed time too. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jan 23, 2014 13:04:21 GMT
Not a huge surprise: the diversion via Pall Mall didn't help the 9H. The 9H and 15H would have been much more useful had they been allowed to offer a through service from Kensington to the Tower but I understand this couldn't be done. If the 15 gains NB4Ls, you can imagine the 15H going in a blaze of 'the old Routemaster hands over to the new' publicity. Can the 15H continue beyond 2017 anyway?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2014 13:05:41 GMT
No great suprise I suppose especially with 'modern day routemasters' now on the 9, well at least when the CA is present and the back door open.
The 15H might survive as the extra capacity to and from the Tower of London is useful, in fact it would be nice if the buses from the 9H could be used to extend the 15H to Paddington which would allow the 159 to be curtailed at Oxford Circus or Marble Arch.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jan 23, 2014 13:13:19 GMT
I believe the 15H is not allowed to do anything that the 15 doesn't do: it is seen as potentially discriminatory to offer a through service using non-accessible vehicles if there isn't an accessible through service (hence the separate 9H and 15H instead of a more useful through Kensington-Tower service). But I would like to see the 15H run through to Regent Street - this would standardise the central terminus, bring RMs back to Piccadilly Circus and be a boon to tourists going to the West End.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 23, 2014 13:16:42 GMT
No great suprise I suppose especially with 'modern day routemasters' now on the 9, well at least when the CA is present and the back door open. The 15H might survive as the extra capacity to and from the Tower of London is useful, in fact it would be nice if the buses from the 9H could be used to extend the 15H to Paddington which would allow the 159 to be curtailed at Oxford Circus or Marble Arch. You couldn't replace a standard route with one that doesn't allow disabled access - kind of limits who can actually use it. I'm quite annoyed about this as if the ridiculous idea of building the NBfL didn't go ahead, the 9H could of been saved and then restructured to better serve Central London. Personally, there should of been a 159H running from Imperial War Museum to Oxford Circus. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2014 13:40:42 GMT
I believe the 15H is not allowed to do anything that the 15 doesn't do: it is seen as potentially discriminatory to offer a through service using non-accessible vehicles if there isn't an accessible through service (hence the separate 9H and 15H instead of a more useful through Kensington-Tower service). But I would like to see the 15H run through to Regent Street - this would standardise the central terminus, bring RMs back to Piccadilly Circus and be a boon to tourists going to the West End. That's only some daft rule that TfL came up with, DDA doesn't start for another three years and the whole route would be duplicated by other supposedly fully accessible buses, the 436 could do the Paddington Basin bit |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jan 23, 2014 13:51:43 GMT
I believe the 15H is not allowed to do anything that the 15 doesn't do: it is seen as potentially discriminatory to offer a through service using non-accessible vehicles if there isn't an accessible through service (hence the separate 9H and 15H instead of a more useful through Kensington-Tower service). But I would like to see the 15H run through to Regent Street - this would standardise the central terminus, bring RMs back to Piccadilly Circus and be a boon to tourists going to the West End. That's only some daft rule that TfL came up with, DDA doesn't start for another three years and the whole route would be duplicated by other supposedly fully accessible buses, the 436 could do the Paddington Basin bit 'Allowed' might not have been the most appropriate word for me to use there: I think it's best seen as a TfL principle, in terms of being able to say they've already complied with the accessibility requirements, and it's at least questionable whether it could continue post 2017. |
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Jan 23, 2014 15:36:56 GMT
I remember an episode on 'Running London's Roads' where an engineer from X talked about working with the route masters and how he loved them. It'll be a shame if they were to go...
|
|
|
|
Post by RM5chris on Jan 23, 2014 17:33:24 GMT
....your one route away Ken Livingstone from being the dehumanised monster....
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 23, 2014 17:42:34 GMT
I remember an episode on 'Running London's Roads' where an engineer from X talked about working with the route masters and how he loved them. It'll be a shame if they were to go... They're going so it is a shame for those who are bothered about this but they'll just have to put up with it. I am sure people will moan, complain, lobby and ask the Mayor awkward questions but the Heritage routes are an utter anachronism and far too expensive and have been since the day they started. I am sure the engineer at Westbourne Park will shed a tear when they leave but he may well opt to retire - I think he said something like that on the show. I doubt we'll ever know though. |
|
