On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:00:59 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:

The 49 and 328 are both single decker routes desperately in need of
double deckers. Is there a process or trigger level that causes TfL to
ask the operator to provide DDs?

well the 28/31/328 group of routes have been retendered recently and the
choice of vehicle is still being debated. However the TfL Business Plan
says the intent - subject to funding - is to restore double deckers.
About time too.

Can't comment on the 49 but your comment is not the only one I've heard
on that subject.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:00:59 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:

The 49 and 328 are both single decker routes desperately in need of
double deckers. Is there a process or trigger level that causes TfL to
ask the operator to provide DDs?

well the 28/31/328 group of routes have been retendered recently and the
choice of vehicle is still being debated. However the TfL Business Plan
says the intent - subject to funding - is to restore double deckers.
About time too.


About time too.

--
Lawrence Myers


Can't comment on the 49 but your comment is not the only one I've heard
on that subject.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:00:59 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:


The 49 and 328 are both single decker routes desperately in need of
double deckers. Is there a process or trigger level that causes TfL to
ask the operator to provide DDs?


well the 28/31/328 group of routes have been retendered recently and the
choice of vehicle is still being debated. However the TfL Business Plan
says the intent - subject to funding - is to restore double deckers.
About time too.

Can't comment on the 49 but your comment is not the only one I've heard
on that subject.

The other people who've commented are probably the others jammed onto
the 49. :-) I only use it occasionally; I feel sorry for those who use
it every day. It seems to suffer from permanent running in pairs at an
unacceptable frequency for an obviously busy service...

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7

Bear in mind the 155 went through this when they downgraded this from M's to
LDP's. Though this was due to the 355 being created. Recent tender gained
and new PVL's operate. I am sure London United want to move the DP/DPS off
to other more useful routes and bring TA's.


"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:00:59 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:

The 49 and 328 are both single decker routes desperately in need of
double deckers. Is there a process or trigger level that causes TfL to
ask the operator to provide DDs?

well the 28/31/328 group of routes have been retendered recently and the
choice of vehicle is still being debated. However the TfL Business Plan
says the intent - subject to funding - is to restore double deckers.
About time too.

Can't comment on the 49 but your comment is not the only one I've heard
on that subject.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.560 / Virus Database: 352 - Release Date: 08/01/2004

Paul Corfield typed


On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:00:59 +0000, Dave Arquati wrote:

The 49 and 328 are both single decker routes desperately in need of
double deckers. Is there a process or trigger level that causes TfL to
ask the operator to provide DDs?

well the 28/31/328 group of routes have been retendered recently and the
choice of vehicle is still being debated. However the TfL Business Plan
says the intent - subject to funding - is to restore double deckers.
About time too.

Can't comment on the 49 but your comment is not the only one I've heard
on that subject.

Just as well. 31 is a sardine can on wheels...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.