One aspect of the new buses I note hasn't been commented on here is the
registrations.

Although the prototypes were given London LT12 xxx marks last year, the new
buses on route 24 I saw on Tuesday all seem to have Belfast marks LTZ10xx
where xx is the same as the LTxx fleet number of each bus.

These are therefore the first new buses with marks matching fleet numbers
since the new registration marks system was introduced in 2001, if not
before.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:13:09 PM UTC-4, wrote:
One aspect of the new buses I note hasn't been commented on here is the

registrations.



Although the prototypes were given London LT12 xxx marks last year, the new

buses on route 24 I saw on Tuesday all seem to have Belfast marks LTZ10xx

where xx is the same as the LTxx fleet number of each bus.



These are therefore the first new buses with marks matching fleet numbers

since the new registration marks system was introduced in 2001, if not

before.



--

Colin Rosenstiel

These would also appear to be the first TfL specified bus fleet numbers since the sale of East Thames buses. Which leads one to wonder whether TfL should just specify its own type designations and fleet numbers for all franchise operators' buses. If you've ever looked down on a modern London bus you'll notice that they bear their fleet number preceded with an operator code in large letters on the roof. Maybe it'd be easier for the TfL CCTV operators who need that information if there was a single type designation and fleet numbering system across London?

Qhat with a reintroduction of a single bus livery and now imposition of a new standard type of bus on operators, this could lead to the Tory Mayor of London presiding over something his socialist predecessor failed to achieve, a re-establishment of Central Road Services in all but name...
--
Roy

On 12/07/2013 19:25, Paul Corfield wrote:

All the other buses are owned by the bus companies or else leased by
them. Why should a company like Abellio which has no link to a former
LT subsidiary be forced to muck around with its asset management and
accounting systems just because TfL say so? It's daft and if TfL were
going to impose this on firms then I'd expect the extra costs to be
factored in. You then have to ask why the public purse has to have
these extra costs imposed?

It does presumably work for the trains, which have a common numbering
system, even if it is fraying around the edges a bit.

Qhat with a reintroduction of a single bus livery and now imposition of a new standard type of bus on operators, this could lead to the Tory Mayor of London
presiding over something his socialist predecessor failed to achieve, a re-establishment of Central Road Services in all but name...

This rather presumes that Boris really gives a toss about bus
services.

If he doesn't, might that mean TfL is ignored and left to get on and do
whatever it wants to do?

He doesn't - the NB4L is a Policy Exchange idea not a Boris
idea. All that has happened under Boris is that fares have gone up
more than 50% in 5 years,

Anyone know what % of bus passengers actually pay full fare?

subsidy has been slashed and any meaningful
expansion of services to keep pace with soaring demand has stopped.

Wasn't there a fair bit of expansion under the previous mayor? As an
incomer, I think there could a risk of overkill (with the exception of
one route which needs reinstating, of course!).

His first term promise to deliver new orbital bus services was killed
off on cost grounds after the X26 trial.

Was there actually a promise to deliver, or merely an intention to
investigate? I get the impression that a lot of political "promises"
don't actually exist other than in the media reporting of them, with the
politicians' "subject to further study" and "if it is viable"
disclaimers getting "lost" in the reporting.



--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Paul Corfield wrote

On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 23:13:14 +0100, Arthur Figgis
wrote:

Anyone know what % of bus passengers actually pay full fare?

Not off the top of my head but you need to define what "full fare"
actually means in the context of your question. The £2.40 cash fare
or
the Oyster £1.40 fare.

Not only that but AF unthinkingly asked "% of bus passengers"

So if a passanger makes 4 or 4+ Oyster journeys a day they must be
counted as not paying full fare that day and probably the same if they
used a ODTC or season ticket.

If the question was "% of bus journeys where the full fare was paid"
the answer is different again.

Same outside London - is a day ticket or return ticket or PlusBus "full
fare" ?

--
Mike D

Paul Corfield wrote in
:

His [Boris's] first term promise to deliver new orbital bus services
was killed off on cost grounds after the X26 trial.

Do you mean that the X26 trial was regarded as unsuccessful? Every time
I use it, it seems pretty busy - often with standing passengers between
Sutton and Kingston or beyond. Is the 30 minute frequency still regarded as
a trial?

Peter

--
|| Peter CS ~ Epsom ~ UK ||

On 15/07/2013 16:28, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 13:24:51 +0000 (UTC), Peter CS
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote in
:

His [Boris's] first term promise to deliver new orbital bus services
was killed off on cost grounds after the X26 trial.

Do you mean that the X26 trial was regarded as unsuccessful? Every time
I use it, it seems pretty busy - often with standing passengers between
Sutton and Kingston or beyond. Is the 30 minute frequency still regarded as
a trial?

Yes it was deemed unsuccessful because although there was an increase
in usage the resultant revenue in no way covered the extra costs nor
were there compensating passenger benefits. Read the TfL Panel paper
from about 4 years ago.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...s-Services.pdf

I know it is very busy - it always has been when I've used it. When
you're fighting for a seat at East Croydon station you know you've got
a problem!

The current service level has been preserved despite the extra cost in
subsidy. I think it was politically unacceptable to try to go back to
an hourly service. The service has since been retendered so there
might have been some decrease in costs as a result of competitive
bidding for the contract.

I've heard claims recently that X26 drivers have been refusing to carry
passengers with luggage, causing much confusion at Heathrow.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:11 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
Instead we have buses that resemble saunas on wheels being touted as
the latest best thing ever. I'd love to know how many regular users of
the 24 have abandoned the route since it was converted to NB4L
operation. Some of the tweets from people using the route have been
far from good reading for TfL / the Mayor.

Is the aircon in these buses faulty or just inadequate for the job?

--
Spud

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 12:23:00 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:21:23 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:55:11 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
Instead we have buses that resemble saunas on wheels being touted as
the latest best thing ever. I'd love to know how many regular users of
the 24 have abandoned the route since it was converted to NB4L
operation. Some of the tweets from people using the route have been
far from good reading for TfL / the Mayor.

Is the aircon in these buses faulty or just inadequate for the job?

They don't have air con according to statements from TfL. They have an
air cooling system.

I presume that means its just forced induction. Given the price of the buses
you'd think air con would have been specified. Or perhaps it would have
reduced their supposed enviromental credentials.

TfL and the Mayor have said the system is fixed but this has emerged
from the depths of Twitter this morning. It's from a West Midlands
based air conditioning systems business.

http://www.graysonts.com/grayson-sol...-con-meltdown/

So more powerful fans then )

--
Spud

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:56:30 +0100
Paul Corfield wrote:
Full refrigerant based air con, as used on buses in the Far East,
would require an extra axle on the NB4L (based on informed comment

Can I take it then that the Boris Bus is very close to being at the weight
limit for 2 axle vehicles?

The NB4L is trying to be a bendy open boarding, double deck, platform
"air con" bus and it doesn't really work on the evidence to date. It's
heavy, the air cooling seems not to work, it doesn't carry 87
passengers (as per TfL's spec) and the conductor guards the open
platform to try to stop people hurting themselves.

Thats what you get when a politician who knows nothing about buses sets
out the brief for a new one. I'm not sure its going to turn out to be quite
the showpiece reminder of his tenure that he thinks it will.

So more powerful fans then )

Possibly but this runs the risk of having to redesign the bus possibly
adding weight or increasing power requirements. That then starts to

I suppose they could always swallow some pride and simply put in opening
windows. Cheap and it works. Though I won't be laying money on it happening.

--
Spud

wrote in message
...

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 13:56:30 +0100 Paul Corfield
wrote:
The NB4L is trying to be a bendy open boarding, double deck, platform
"air con" bus and it doesn't really work on the evidence to date. It's
heavy, the air cooling seems not to work, it doesn't carry 87
passengers (as per TfL's spec) and the conductor guards the open
platform to try to stop people hurting themselves.

That's what you get when a politician who knows nothing about buses sets
out the brief for a new one. I'm not sure its going to turn out to be
quite
the showpiece reminder of his tenure that he thinks it will.

Exactly the same problem as on the railways then, with the already loathed
IEP trains - which haven't even been built yet.