|
Post by rmz19 on May 4, 2016 15:34:07 GMT
One of the best looking buses to ever grace the streets of London...that's if it actually graces the streets of London, really hope it does. Of course no bus is perfect, in this case the elliptical lower rear window doesn't do it any justice, would've been much better if it was symmetrical.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 26, 2016 16:04:48 GMT
Go-Ahead sure got a bunch of great looking buses. It's bank holiday weekend coming up and I may be tempted to ride on the new EvoSetis! I like the rear of both the MMC and especially the EvoSeti - I do think the all-red on the buses these days looks a lot more smart and pronounced with a bit of black here and there to compliment the look (such as the 27s ADHs and W's TEHs). I think that's why I like the look of Metroline/Go-Ahead's/TT's Gemini 3s, while I think London United's VHs are really ugly. I partly agree with your points. All-Red buses combined with black surrounds look smart and appealing. Regarding Metroline/Stagecoachs's Gemini 3s, the way the black adorns the rear doesn't look as appealing as it does on other buses, the glossy finish doesn't help either, as opposed to the matte effect on the MMCs and EvoSetis. Also, I personally like LU's VHs regardless of the facelift, they are perfect examples of how to rock the All-Red look with the right amount of black, they look very smart in comparison to others and the rear is designed just right.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 25, 2016 21:53:06 GMT
It appears that the partly covered black rear is a design trend on new buses these days. The MHVs rock them really well like the MMCs, the same can't be said for the Gemini 3s on the other hand. Does look nice but don't be surprised that in 5-7 years should they retain the routes these buses could possibly loose the black rear surroundings courtasy of Hants & Dorset Trim Ltd. I certainly hope not! This mistake was already made with the DWs which also looked great with the black surrounds.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 25, 2016 13:47:02 GMT
It appears that the partly covered black rear is a design trend on new buses these days. The MHVs rock them really well like the MMCs, the same can't be said for the Gemini 3s on the other hand.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 24, 2016 18:45:52 GMT
The Bakerloo Line may be relatively less busy than other lines with an annual ridership of 112k, but it's still considerably busy nonetheless. Although now that Paddington is temporarily closed, I suppose this can be more easily justified...for now Surely that's understated by a factor of at least 1,000 and possibly more than that? If you have 3.5m-4.0m pass jnys per day on the tube network the Bakerloo Line would have to only run for 1/2 of one day a week to have a figure as low as yours. I've tried to find line level annual ridership numbers for the Tube but can't find them in any TfL document. Actually the most recent Bakerloo Line ridership figure I could find reflects 2011/12, which is 111k. I increased it by a 1000 so as to reflect the present, just to be on the safe side
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 24, 2016 18:38:32 GMT
I'm afraid I won't miss the 72ts. The ride quality is absolutely atrocious, they feel very unstable even at quite low speeds. I honestly think the much hated "Pacer" DMUs ride better (not forgetting that Network Rail track usually appears to be maintained to a higher standard than LUL track). I find that 1990s onwards LUL stock rides better than the older stuff, a good comparison is D Stock vs S Stock on the District Line (although I guess 73ts vs S Stock on the Uxbridge branch is a good one too, but I've never been on the 73ts down there). I'm not a massive fan of the D stock TBH - I find them extremely dull unlike the C stock which I thought sounded more interesting. I do like they have openable windows though. The S stock are far more interesting and so much nicer to ride. I'm also no fan of the 73 stock either - I find them really uncomfortable and they've not aged well at all. In my opinion both the 72 and D stock are great. The ride quality of the former is very good for its age, it's the condition of the tracks which needs attention, the 72 stock is otherwise smooth on newer tracks and this is evident on some sections along the Bakerloo Line. I really like the D stock too, its ride quality is notably smoother than other stock during the time it was introduced apparently due to some sort of suspension which enables for a relatively softer ride.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 24, 2016 11:41:03 GMT
The Bakerloo line is my favourite line with the best trains , no matter their condition. When they were new they were my favourites too! I think the Bakerloo has been reported as the quietest Undergroud line as a whole. So this may contribute to why it is destined to be the last to receive new rolling stock. The Bakerloo Line may be relatively less busy than other lines with an annual ridership of 112k, but it's still considerably busy nonetheless. Although now that Paddington is temporarily closed, I suppose this can be more easily justified...for now
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 14, 2016 20:44:28 GMT
Ah memories. I remember when these buses were on the 187, they were quite loud inside but they had a great ride, I used to like them a lot.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 12, 2016 22:03:40 GMT
So the preinstalled 'Air Cooling' system is deemed pointless then. But anyway, now we shall certainly see if this an effective solution to the immense heat or not.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 11, 2016 21:36:39 GMT
Have they fallen apart yet? Is the hybrid diesel/camel? Well Camels can go a very long way without water, so if that's anything to go by then they'll be very reliable
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 11, 2016 20:47:24 GMT
Amazing to see the contrast of these MCV DDs in Egypt where they were manufactured and seeing them now in their hometown Have they fallen apart yet? it's a bit early for that assumption don't you think? But due to other MCV buses being brilliant, then it looks promising for these.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 11, 2016 10:51:01 GMT
Amazing to see the contrast of these MCV DDs in Egypt where they were manufactured and seeing them now in their hometown
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 8, 2016 11:41:16 GMT
We [LT4] have broken down at Angel in the outside lane. Why aren't you giving it a push into the inside lane? Super dooper reliable buses those NB4Ls. Nah it would rather clog up the whole of Angel, just as they do in Central London
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 8, 2016 11:39:48 GMT
As far as Night Buses go: 271, EL1 and H37 (weekends only).
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Apr 5, 2016 16:31:06 GMT
Good suggestions, definantly a thread that I feel I need to participate in as I used to regularly drive the 208 and now I regularly drive the 484. I have made the suggestion a few weeks back about the 484 extension to North Greenwich. There is photographic evidence on the net somewhere of DP192 (which I believe is a 10.8metre dart) on the 484 in the tight part of the route when Go-Agead operated it. This is proof they can operate it and as a professional driver I do believe that with careful and professional driving you could get a new C10 MMC around the route. These new buses are actually fully blinded for the 484, a persuational tactic which I have tried recently, but a point blank refusal of 'we arent allowed anything longer on the 484 than its current buses is all that I am met with. As much as the route can seem long I do feel that at times it resembles a magic roundabout affair and could help out with this relatively short extension. The 208 has long been the trunk route between Bromley and Lewisham. I also drove the 261 at the same time and as much as the famous 'the 261 is quicker than the 208 by a few minutes' argument reigns, it isnt the same view shared by the regulars. The 199 is the best option to Bromley as this doesnt bring another route into the already overcrowded Lewisham. Well they must be concerned about using 10.8m buses on the 484 otherwise I suspect you wouldn't of been met with such resistance. As I said before, the extension to North Greenwich would make it too long IMO as it's fairly lengthy as it is and the 10.2m buses would probably get swamped along side the 108's buses. Also, I feel the 484 should be extended at the other end to provide the southern section of Old Kent Road with an important link to King's College Hospital. The 484 would be lengthy indeed, but at around 11 miles and some 30 mins added to its max journey time of 53 mins the route should manage just fine. An alternative route to extend over the 108 could be the 284, it's slightly shorter in all respects and would introduce new links between North Greenwich/Blackheath and Grove Park. It would've been even better if the route still had the brilliant OmniTowns for extra capacity, especially due to their full size SD feel.
|
|