|
|
Route 316
Sept 3, 2016 20:45:37 GMT
via mobile
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 3, 2016 20:45:37 GMT
What is the official allocation on the 113?
|
|
|
|
Post by T.R. on Sept 3, 2016 22:42:02 GMT
What is the official allocation on the 113? 59-reg TEs new to E2 at AH. These are mixed with other TEs at EW. |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Sept 4, 2016 2:32:42 GMT
What a way to kill the excitement of the 316's anticipated DD conversion  However, at this stage I wouldn't rule it out despite the lack of any reliable information regarding this, I really hope TFL see some sense and pursue this case. Also the alleged extension to Staples Corner is unnecessary, extra capacity should be prioritised over an insignificant extension, especially as it concerns the 316. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 316
Sept 4, 2016 2:58:16 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2016 2:58:16 GMT
What a way to kill the excitement of the 316's anticipated DD conversion However, at this stage I wouldn't rule it out despite the lack of any reliable information regarding this, I really hope TFL see some sense and pursue this case. Also the alleged extension to Staples Corner is unnecessary, extra capacity should be prioritised over an insignificant extension, especially as it concerns the 316. I still don't get the point/reason for an extension. I can only assume it's to get a route to serve the retail park to and from the south which could be done by diverting the 32 or 266 without any significant addition to journey time (southbound buses can run the full length of Geron Way, northbound buses can enter Geron Way via the south end and traverse the roundabout by Maplin. I can only think TfL wouldn't like two-way, double running but I don't see the issue of they/the council can introduce parking restrictions there (with a huge car park available there is no need to park along Geron Way) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2016 3:40:34 GMT
I'll put it to bed. The 316 isn't getting DDs contrary to reports on the FOI request sent a while back which has had errors in the past. Drivers haven't be been trained and for those still skeptical there are no DDs to even deck the route. Once the 483 is introduced on the 10th it would mean W have no TEs left as they would have all been transferred to HT. All the TAs are going bar 5 which stay for the school routes. There are no plans to acquire the ex Abellio E400s either, not sure where that one has come from either.
For those who may have seen pics of them at Thorntons, it is standard practice for off-lease vehicles to be returned in the exact condition they were purchased in, Metroline ended up repainting all the batch TP348-402 before sending them off lease.
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 4, 2016 4:17:56 GMT
I'll put it to bed. The 316 isn't getting DDs contrary to reports on the FOI request sent a while back which has had errors in the past. Drivers haven't be been trained and for those still skeptical there are no DDs to even deck the route. Once the 483 is introduced on the 10th it would mean W have no TEs left as they would have all been transferred to HT. All the TAs are going bar 5 which stay for the school routes. There are no plans to acquire the ex Abellio E400s either, not sure where that one has come from either. For those who may have seen pics of them at Thorntons, it is standard practice for off-lease vehicles to be returned in the exact condition they were purchased in, Metroline ended up repainting all the batch TP348-402 before sending them off lease. what about the TEs from the 82 and 113? It would be miracle if the 316 was double decked. I don't how the 316 would be double decked unless the residence in North Kensington change their mind about double decks being allowed on their road or the 316 is altered. |
|
|
|
Route 316
Sept 4, 2016 7:51:24 GMT
via mobile
Post by Nathan on Sept 4, 2016 7:51:24 GMT
Wait, wasn't the route retained with double deckers this year? Or am I completely misinformed?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 316
Sept 4, 2016 8:34:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2016 8:34:39 GMT
I'll put it to bed. The 316 isn't getting DDs contrary to reports on the FOI request sent a while back which has had errors in the past. Drivers haven't be been trained and for those still skeptical there are no DDs to even deck the route. Once the 483 is introduced on the 10th it would mean W have no TEs left as they would have all been transferred to HT. All the TAs are going bar 5 which stay for the school routes. There are no plans to acquire the ex Abellio E400s either, not sure where that one has come from either. For those who may have seen pics of them at Thorntons, it is standard practice for off-lease vehicles to be returned in the exact condition they were purchased in, Metroline ended up repainting all the batch TP348-402 before sending them off lease. what about the TEs from the 82 and 113? It would be miracle if the 316 was double decked. I don't how the 316 would be double decked unless the residence in North Kensington change their mind about double decks being allowed on their road or the 316 is altered. It's too early to comment on the TEs from the 82 but I imagine they will be used to make up an existing buses bid but for a new route. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 4, 2016 8:36:07 GMT
Wait, wasn't the route retained with double deckers this year? Or am I completely misinformed? No it awarded with existing single deckers. The confusion comes when people ask TFL via FOI about double decking the 316 and TFL have replied saying that the 316 will be double decked. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Sept 4, 2016 9:27:52 GMT
what about the TEs from the 82 and 113? It would be miracle if the 316 was double decked. I don't how the 316 would be double decked unless the residence in North Kensington change their mind about double decks being allowed on their road or the 316 is altered. It's too early to comment on the TEs from the 82 but I imagine they will be used to make up an existing buses bid but for a new route. An ideal route would be route 266. It could run from WJ and route 226 transfer to G, PA or PV. Coming back to route 316, and I wonder why DELs not currently suitable for route 487 did not convert route 316. I rode a DEL on it last October and there were not many seats available, even though it is larger than the usual DEs. |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Sept 4, 2016 9:38:52 GMT
Wait, wasn't the route retained with double deckers this year? Or am I completely misinformed? No it awarded with existing single deckers. The confusion comes when people ask TFL via FOI about double decking the 316 and TFL have replied saying that the 316 will be double decked. Judging by TFL's reply I think the assumption was the case with the moron of the MP along Barlby Road has been rectified, looks like this hasn't happened yet. |
|
|
|
Post by RandomBusesGirl on Sept 4, 2016 18:43:25 GMT
I also wonder what buses will 316 get if decked - currently buses freed from 189 seem the most viable option, but now with 113's result… The again, everyone wondered what was 307 supposed to use when won by PB and they pulled out the buses somehow. I've said this before, but I couldn't give less crap about the little prat who lives in North Kensington. If it were up to me, I'd slap noisiest VPs round his doorstep  |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Sept 4, 2016 21:17:45 GMT
It's too early to comment on the TEs from the 82 but I imagine they will be used to make up an existing buses bid but for a new route. An ideal route would be route 266. It could run from WJ and route 226 transfer to G, PA or PV. Coming back to route 316, and I wonder why DELs not currently suitable for route 487 did not convert route 316. I rode a DEL on it last October and there were not many seats available, even though it is larger than the usual DEs. Or the 266 could go back W. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 5, 2016 9:43:59 GMT
No it awarded with existing single deckers. The confusion comes when people ask TFL via FOI about double decking the 316 and TFL have replied saying that the 316 will be double decked. Judging by TFL's reply I think the assumption was the case with the moron of the MP along Barlby Road has been rectified, looks like this hasn't happened yet. Before we start calling people morons does anybody actually know the full story behind this alleged ban on double deckers on the 316? I can't help feeling that there may be more to this than meets the eye  |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Sept 5, 2016 10:23:34 GMT
Judging by TFL's reply I think the assumption was the case with the moron of the MP along Barlby Road has been rectified, looks like this hasn't happened yet. Before we start calling people morons does anybody actually know the full story behind this alleged ban on double deckers on the 316? I can't help feeling that there may be more to this than meets the eye As it stands, someone banning a route from converting to double deckers because they're concerned about their privacy and haven't yet understood the concept of blinds are automatically morons in my eyes |
|
However, at this stage I wouldn't rule it out despite the lack of any reliable information regarding this, I really hope TFL see some sense and pursue this case. Also the alleged extension to Staples Corner is unnecessary, extra capacity should be prioritised over an insignificant extension, especially as it concerns the 316.
