|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 14, 2020 23:48:45 GMT
A question for you guys: Which bus type do you want to see in your area? (can be old withdrawn types as well) I really want to see the Caetano e.city gold in my area and the Caetano Nimbus vehicles More full size single decks! London is seriously lacking them, let alone my area
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 14, 2020 23:41:53 GMT
The 210 shares the Brent Cross terminus with the 143 and C11 rather than passing it, does that count? I know it does. However, not only did I see little point in disclosing that there's a shared terminus as I assumed everyone knows this but I felt it makes little difference, for instance before I stated that the 120/H32 share a southern terminus but didn't see the need to do so in future posts ok. Apologies for being pedantic, just curious as to whether sharing a terminus counts as passing it or not.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 14, 2020 20:01:08 GMT
The 210 passes the termini of the 143 and C11. The 210 shares the Brent Cross terminus with the 143 and C11 rather than passing it, does that count?
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 12, 2020 12:23:38 GMT
The Olympus was such a great bus, save for the firm ride they had such a sleek and modern design. Such a shame to see them being withdrawn relatively early in London. The MetroDecker is the successor, hopefully there's a larger presence of them in London soon. Hopefully not, the Olympus had style with its huge windows and sleek lines. The MetroDecker has all the style of a toilet on wheels. I'm rather fond of the MetroDecker's design. While I find the Olympus is a bit better than the MetroDecker in this respect I like the latter's front end, side windows and interior. The bottom rear window is questionable but it doesn't really bother me much.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 12, 2020 11:46:18 GMT
SEL806 has been withdrawn - the last one gone. The Olympus was such a great bus, save for the firm ride they had such a sleek and modern design. Such a shame to see them being withdrawn relatively early in London. The MetroDecker is the successor, hopefully there's a larger presence of them in London soon.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 12, 2020 2:37:47 GMT
The 18 could do with partial assistance alongside, however not at the expense of cutting the 18 as it serves its purpose well in connecting Sudbury/Wembley with Central London via an essentially direct corridor, fiddling with it would just lead to unnecessary inconvenience. The 18 does not have any reliability issues and is completely fine in this regard. Personally I would restructure the 23 to run between Marble Arch and Wembley Park via line of route to Harrow Road, alongside the 18 to Wembley Central then up Wembley Hill Road to Wembley Park. To compensate for the withdrawn part of the 23 I would reinstate the former 10, which in turn could be rerouted via Wigmore Street as an alternative to Oxford Street. Where would it stand in Wembley Park? There is a possibility for a stand to be built within the grounds of Asda
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 12, 2020 1:49:46 GMT
New Route
Shepherd's Bush Green Wood Lane White City Station Scrubs Lane Harrow Road Harlesden Clock Tower Craven Park Harrow Road Stonebridge Park Wembley High Road Wembley Central Station
Basically a mix of the 18 and 220 as way of linking Wembley to Shepherd's Bush, would support both routes, perhaps allowing for half the 220 to terminate at Shepherd's Bush at the northern end so that the service can improve at the southern end where the route is very busy and is battling with terrible congestion.
I have previously suggested operating a route along these lines, going from Sudbury to Shepherds Bush, or possibly onwards to Hammersmith. This could allow the 18 to be cut back slightly, to Wembley, Harlesden or Willesden Junction, improving reliability. Then I would reroute the 220 to East Acton, replacing the 72, and increasing capacity on this section. The 18 could do with partial assistance alongside, however not at the expense of cutting the 18 as it serves its purpose well in connecting Sudbury/Wembley with Central London via an essentially direct corridor, fiddling with it would just lead to unnecessary inconvenience. The 18 does not have any reliability issues and is completely fine in this regard. Personally I would restructure the 23 to run between Marble Arch and Wembley Park via line of route to Harrow Road, alongside the 18 to Wembley Central then up Wembley Hill Road to Wembley Park. To compensate for the withdrawn part of the 23 I would reinstate the former 10, which in turn could be rerouted via Wigmore Street as an alternative to Oxford Street.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 11, 2020 13:36:50 GMT
ADH45259 takes the honours of being the first 67reg to have the "sudden death syndrome" in my control anyway. Once at Hatch End towards SH and coming back right at the top of Harrow Weald just after I pulled away from the bus stop, luckily it didn't roll back. I have been told by a colleague the 62regs suffer from it at times aswell so basically this can happen to any of the ADHs it is not just the 68regs anymore. Edit: add Long Elmes and Pinner to the mix now. Total after 2 rounders was 6x Had 281 second half an as usual it died at Stanmore Church just as I was coming into Stanmore. I don't like the E400H anymore. I never once had this issue with a B5LH. if there are continuous problems like these on Enviro 400MMCs I don't know why it is so popular with Abellio, Stagecoach and Go Ahead London. What bus operator would want a vehicle that is unreliable? Good to see that RATP show no signs of buying MMCs any time soon ( I don't mind the BYD Enviros). From a passengers point of view I have been on the Enviro 400MMC ADH once on the H12 and all I could hear was rattles. The bus was not comfortable and I wanted to get off it as soon as I could. With VHs (I have been on every single HH VH (60 VHs)) they show few creaks about the place - but that was only on VH45308. The vehicles themselves feel more smoother than the ADHs and feel faster. The only complaint about the VHs I have is that on a 285 VH the bus is quite jerky and the brakes were quite sharp on - everyone on the bus struggled to hold on (this is the same driver I have had for many years and he usually stops the bus smoothly). I have a mixed opinion when it comes to the design of the bus - from the front of an ADH I prefer to the front of a VH but for the rear of the buses I much prefer the VH (looks far more better). It questions me if operators are buying the Enviro 400MMCs because they are more expensive thinking they will get a better product. One experience does not account for all. You may get the odd creak and rattle here and there but this by no means suggests that the MMCs are unreliable/have build quality issues because they do not. The same logic can also be applied to the Gemini 3s, there were many instances when I heard creaks and rattles on them however it doesn't mean they are inferior as 'imperfections' like this are inevitable, nothing is perfect. The MMC and Gemini 3 are equally fine in this respect. On a personal note, I find the MMC's design more visually appealing, it's certainly among the best designed buses.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 9, 2020 20:05:53 GMT
We really must not lose our minds over this. I think that is the more worrying aspect of this whole issue. Life must go on in a civilised fashion, whilst accepting risks, which we all do every day anyway without really even acknowledging it. Has anybody lost their minds over it? Life does seem to be going on pretty much as normal apart from the lack of hand gell in shops. Some people kind of have, with many hygeine necessities selling out thanks to the panic - buying going on at the moment. If people opened up their minds a bit and not allow the media to scaremonger them then perhaps things would be more civilised.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 5, 2020 1:30:39 GMT
Today I was waiting for a 472 at Woolwich to head to North Greenwich, DW425 on the 99 was emptying out at the stop. As it headed off to the terminus to stand I was observing it from a distance and the body appeared to not be aligned to the chassis. I wonder if this is a maintenance issue as I've noticed this on a few old buses.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 29, 2020 5:20:24 GMT
We should start a chewing gum count in them too. Unfortunately London is a place where such poor behaviour by the minority passes with impunity - for those who continually ask why buses in London have a functional spec without luxuries, wanton vandalism plays a part in that. When I visited a bus station Singapore, they lent umbrellas and charge packs to customers and the return rate was pretty much 100%. Could we have a scheme like that here? Errrm...! Completely agree. This kind of behaviour really puts London to shame, frankly it's embarrassing. This is all down to discipline and education but that's another matter.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 28, 2020 14:16:48 GMT
Bring them out to the suburbs. I will happily ride on one any day. That would be great! Dispersing some LTs to the suburbs would mean more conventionals in Central London therefore not having to deal the boredom of their sheer omnipresence anymore
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 27, 2020 15:06:45 GMT
Went out to chase it..too late. DLE30050 and DLE30070 were very nice though. The MMC versions are nice and really should of been the Pointers successor but the older body Enviro 200's are about as passenger friendly as a shopping trolley. Lool shopping trolley Though hilarious, it's actually a fair analogy.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 27, 2020 10:31:55 GMT
Precisely. Should really have a full refurbishment to make it as good as any other bridge. Will probably survive longer in the long term if that happens aswell Well if anyone wants to start up a crowd funding page for an additional £30m? I think most people will just be glad to see the bridge reopened and a lower weight limit also keeps heavy lorries out of the area. But doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of the bridge renovation in the first place? Why renovate a bridge only for the end result to be the same as it was previously i.e. still have a weight restriction? I personally don't believe accommodating 'heavier' electric SDs was the intention at all, just upon realising that it would cost much more than anticipated to accommodate Double Decks/heavy vehicles that the cheaper option was chosen and now the public will have to deal with overcrowded buses on routes that really need Double Decks, on top of the ridiculously long wait for the bridge to reopen.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Feb 27, 2020 2:41:19 GMT
I wish they where removed out of Central London and into the suburbs if it is true that they run in diesel mode and not hybrid mode. Partly agree. Personally I wouldn't want all of them to be withdrawn, just more 'conventional' buses replacing some of them in Central London with some LTs remaining for a more balanced variety as there are simply too many of them concentrated in one area.
|
|