|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 15, 2015 3:26:03 GMT
I suspect the introduction of a 483 is part of a Mayoral strategy to brag about how many bus routes are operated by TfL. Since the 29 reverted to ordinary double deck buses, I feel the 329 has been rendered unnecessary. The 29 could easily be extended back to Enfield, perhaps with some journeys terminating at Winchmore Hill. Wood Green is very fortunate to have three decent frequent services into Zone 1 - 29, 67 and 141 - when you consider how frequent the Piccadilly Line is. Not many areas are so blessed. However those routes are all prone to problems in Zone 1. I suspect the users of the 329 are actually fairly happy to have a localised route that is frequent and reasonably reliable - not perfect but not bad IME of using it. They wouldn't be pleased to be relying on a route running from Zone 1 if it meant big gaps, curtailments etc. The 329 is not exactly immune from those itself and that's just with having to deal with Enfield's, Palmers Green's and Wood Green's traffic jams and parking. I assume you left out the 243 because it isn't as 'decent' as the other three...if so I'd say your right, that route can be a right pain!
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 14, 2015 22:28:18 GMT
E400City looks far better than the MMC to my eyes....although still not convinced about the 'bum' that the 2 of them share - although it looks less pronounced on the City.... Fair enough - personally, it's the shortening of the upstairs front window on the front that looks odd, the unsymmetrical part at the bottom, the top section of the rear doesn't seem as good looking (it's the only thing I don't like on the Enviro 200 MMC and only a Metrobus can pull off that kind of unsymmetrical style at the front IMO) and the rear windows on the sides don't look right either. I do think the glass at the staircase looks good though even if I'd rather that wasn't there and the interior suits it more due to more light pouring through. I like both the City and MMC, I do prefer the MMC though. My reasons are similar to yours, the City looks a bit odd at the rear due to the second top rear window above the main one, it would've been better they were fused together or it wasn't there. Also the curve at the top rear deck is 'too curved' and would be more appealing if it was less so, apart from that it's a nice bus.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 14, 2015 21:13:49 GMT
Lool, an interesting conversation it was then! I'd like to think that there are three categories people fall in regarding the LTs: Those who like them, those who hate them, and those who are fine with them but hate the fact that there are too many of them and want more variety. I fall in the third category More variety? Just out of interest, has anyone ever counted how many different types and numbers across the operators? For example: - 1200 Gemini 1/2/3 900 E400 200 E400MMC 700 LT To be clear and refer back to my previous post, yes more variety. There is no need for counting to conclude that there are loads of LTs and will be more in the near future....and even more if the ridiculous short version comes into fruition. Central London is full of them, so to be clearer I should've added in the third category '...and want them dispersed all over London rather than just Central'. The third category is one heck of a sentence now
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 14, 2015 18:58:20 GMT
Oh FFS this is just getting ridiculous....isn't the E400H City more than enough to convert the remaining routes LTs couldn't? I can't understand the importance in these things everyone is already bombarded with left right and centre Is FFS the new Fleet Code for the Volvo versions of this bus? Could very well be, or perhaps it's APB (Absolutely pointless bus)
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 14, 2015 17:08:49 GMT
The passengers' overwhelming favour of the New Routemasters on the 159 is simply because they're new buses. They're clean, they look modern and have a modern interior. Of course, we all know that your typical passenger knows nothing at all about the vehicle on which they're travelling. They probably thought the 55 reg VLAs were 20 years old for all we know. I've certainly heard people on the 172 make comments like that about its Tridents. I even heard comments about London United's on the 199 extras. "Mummy this is a new bus!" "No it's not. It's old. Old old old." And I overheard two young Americans on a Metroline VP on the 98 talk about how old the bus was, and how they preferred the new ones. They also commented on how pressing the bell buttons didn't result in an actual bell sound. Even though where they come from, buses don't make those sounds either. On the other hand there was the group of young people who thought an unrefurbished 54 reg PVL was so nice they weren't sure if it was new or old. "This is nice. Is this a new bus? Doesn't feel like a new bus.". New buses are great for inducing small talk. I was on a 53 not too long ago. There were two people sitting in front of me, talking about the new buses. They really struggled to talk about anything else. The conversation went something like this Person 1: "They've got new buses" Person 2: "Yes. The 78 is new buses too" Person 1: "Oh good" About 10 seconds later Person 2: "...they're upgrading" I despise small talk! Lool, an interesting conversation it was then! I'd like to think that there are three categories people fall in regarding the LTs: Those who like them, those who hate them, and those who are fine with them but hate the fact that there are too many of them and want more variety. I fall in the third category
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 14, 2015 13:07:40 GMT
I wonder where the 13? Spare SOEs from the 164 will go to? When the award was first known I guessed that a new fleet on the 164 was to provide enough SOEs for the 80 and maybe 1 extra on the 163 with the last few for spares around Go Ahead London. As we obviously know 20 SEs were ordered and 6 of them are now on the 80. The 42 was mentioned to oust the scanias but with it would seem a DD conversion whoever wins it that is merely a temporarily home. The SOEs are going on the 42 for now... While I do like the SOEs it seems strange they're going on the 42 as they have lower capacity than the Omnitowns, I suppose it's temporary with a pending DD conversion as you say so it shouldn't be a problem.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 13, 2015 18:43:11 GMT
I always witness the 65 heaving between Kingston and Richmond, extending the 71 to Richmond would help alleviate overcrowding on the 65. Even though the 371 exists it doesn't significantly help the 65, although to be fair this isn't the sole purpose of its existence. As a result of the 71 extension this may see a decrease in the 371's patronage, to combat this the 371 could be given a useful extension to Chiswick via Kew Road. That way the 65 would receive plenty of help along its entire route.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 13, 2015 11:57:28 GMT
Or better yet...the shorter version will never see the light of day and London will be a better place Funnily enough passenger reaction to the LT's on the 159 yesterday was overwhelming favourable in stark contrast to the whinging on here Good for them! Let them bask in its omnipresent glory. I was referring to the shorter version btw
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 13, 2015 3:34:02 GMT
The routes that will convert next are 91, 59 and 68. The rumours are that 3, 139, 189 and 211 will be after those. I would assume the shorter version (after trials) will be allocated to routes 6, 7, 13 (if it isn't discontued) 14, 19, 22, 23, 36, 94 and 98. These are the routes that failed the test for the current NRM. Then possibly 414 & C2. Or better yet...the shorter version will never see the light of day and London will be a better place
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 10, 2015 15:03:54 GMT
Indeed absolutely ridiculous. It would've been much less complicated if the 13 number is kept and extended to Waterloo as initially planned, converting the 13 to LTs and withdrawing the 139 instead to reduce buses along Oxford Street because let's face it, they are the ulterior motives behind this ridiculous consultation. If it was just about reducing buses in Oxford Street that could be done without reductions on Finchley Road, I think it's inevitable that Oxford Street will be pedestrianised in the near future anyway, and the 13 could have been converted to LT at the start of the current contract. Hopefully this daft idea will be ditched, it's Abbey Road that is overbussed anyway not Finchley Road. None of them seem to be overbussed imo. The 139 and 189 go through there rather than one of them overbussing Maida Vale and Finchley Road either side, things are perfectly fine the way they currently are so hopefully as you say this silly idea will be ditched.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 10, 2015 13:31:00 GMT
Been told that some 14/64 reg hybrids (49/211 batch) now have blinds for the 159. Hope there are numerous workings of these on the 159 lol. Don't worry, the 159 will be getting LTs instead to grace your beloved streets of Brixton
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 10, 2015 12:57:23 GMT
Obviously the tenders have been announced since this was written. I would guess 25-28 LTs would be the allocation for 13+139, I think the VHs could oust the VLEs and VEs but a long shot is replace some of the SPs which in turn would could move to London United to replace 2003 TAs and TLAs Right .. So TfL consult on changes which are strongly objected to. But implement change anyway. They withdraw a route (13) mid contract , and "award" revised contract to incumbant operator of old contract at expense of another operator. Then conveniently award just one route out of a few back to the operator out of pocket as a result of their flawed consultation. Stinks to me Indeed absolutely ridiculous. It would've been much less complicated if the 13 number is kept and extended to Waterloo as initially planned, converting the 13 to LTs and withdrawing the 139 instead to reduce buses along Oxford Street because let's face it, they are the ulterior motives behind this ridiculous consultation.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 8, 2015 13:17:16 GMT
So ex Arriva London VGD1 is now WVL 509. Is this the same type of bus as WSD1? If so, will WSD 1 be renumbered WVL510? VGD1 is a B5TL Gemini [3], hence the WVL codes, whereas WSD1 is a Wright StreetDeck. Also, WVL510 is already used, for ex-Metroline VW1469 Speaking of VW1469, I remember it operating on the 7 a few times a while back. (Not my photo) . Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 6, 2015 1:29:12 GMT
Oh FFS this is just getting ridiculous....isn't the E400H City more than enough to convert the remaining routes LTs couldn't? I can't understand the importance in these things everyone is already bombarded with left right and centre
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 5, 2015 0:38:18 GMT
So I saw someone taking pictures of a lamppost on Merton High Street just now. Anyone from here? Lool that was worded in quite a funny way
|
|