Has the PVR been reduced when the 205 was re-tendered? It was always
a busy route, but it seems to have got far worse since ELBG took over.

Is it just that the Scanias have less capacity, so more end up
standing? (They don't look like they do).

Neil

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 19:12:08 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

A quick check shows the Scanias are longer than the typical buses that
Metroline used. Metroline used standard and longer versions of Volvos or
Tridents which had between 60-66 seats. The Scanias seat 63. The total
capacity should be at least 80 passengers to meet TfL's spec.

Thanks.

The potential loss of 3 seats might well be noticeable, though the
legroom is good (it was on the Volvos as well). The Scanias are nice
buses, though they do have the problem you note. Not as bad as the
newest Wrights, though, which appear to waste about a foot and a half
of space (one row of seats, then) at the back of the upper deck as
well. (Or are they hybrids, in which case the space is taken by a
battery pack or something?)

Were it not for Boris's silly scheme, I'd suggest it as a good route
to bendify, though.

Strangely successful for a route that originated from the hourly
Stationlink!

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

"Neil Williams" wrote:

Has the PVR been reduced when the 205 was re-tendered? It was always
a busy route, but it seems to have got far worse since ELBG took over.

Interesting. My perception is that waits for the 15 have got longer since
Stagecoach East London became ELBG. Almost as though they were sneakily
turning out two or three buses less each day, in the hope nobody would
notice. Given that Stagecoach - a pretty efficient business - decided that
there wasn't a sufficient profit margin for them in TfL tendered services, I
wonder if Macquarie are making cuts in naughty ways? Someone from TfL should
be despatched to Strand to count buses.

The 15H still runs very well, but with a PVR of 5 (I think), any cuts would
be obvious.

Chris

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:23:05 -0000, "Chris Read"
wrote:

Interesting. My perception is that waits for the 15 have got longer since
Stagecoach East London became ELBG. Almost as though they were sneakily
turning out two or three buses less each day, in the hope nobody would
notice. Given that Stagecoach - a pretty efficient business - decided that
there wasn't a sufficient profit margin for them in TfL tendered services, I
wonder if Macquarie are making cuts in naughty ways?

I'm not sure of that. ELBG looks like a "busman's bus company" these
days. I doubt Macquarie have much to do with its day to day running,
though if they're cutting costs I suppose maintenance and thus
reliability may suffer.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:21:33 +0000, Neil Williams wrote:

Strangely successful for a route that originated from the hourly
Stationlink!

what was the original route then? Just Paddington to Liverpool St then?

On 17 Dec, 22:53, Martin Petrov
wrote:

what was the original route then? Just Paddington to Liverpool St then?

Of the 205, it was Padd-Mile End. Stationlink was a loop serving most
of (all?) the mainline termini once an hour, starting/finishing at
Victoria Coach Station. It used single-decker buses with 4 wheelchair
spaces, as it'd be unlikely that anyone *not* in a wheelchair would
have chosen to use it given that it was hourly and excruciatingly
slow.

It was turned into the 205 in the north (which has thrived) and the
705 in the south (which didn't and was withdrawn).

Neil

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 19:51:13 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

Err I don't think so. It was originally Paddington - Whitechapel. The
extension to Mile End followed later.

I sit corrected

The huge difference though was that the 205 was given a 10 minute
frequency serving all stops every day of the week at main travel times
while the 705 was half hourly only and limited stop and I'm not even
sure it was a daily service. I think that if the 705 had been every 10
minutes serving all stops then it would have done equally as well.

Valid point, but it (like the RV1) would still have been quite slow -
an advantage of the 205 is that it's basically just straight up the
Euston/City Roads so there isn't much weaving about to be done, unlike
Sarf ov da Rivva.

But I guess the RV1 in a way *is* part of the southern Stationlink -
it certainly links Fenchurch St with Waterloo, at which you can take a
Red Arrow to Victoria (I think)...

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:14:07 +0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

Fair enough - I think the RV1 was really a tourist route by design but
it seems to have grown into something else again. Your comments about
commuter flows were a surprise to me but they make sense if you think
about the places the route serves.

Yep. So far as I can see, it's become the main way (other than
walking) to get from Waterloo and London Bridge to the Tower Bridge
part of the City, and tends to get quite busy.

Which makes it all the more of a joke when First put those tiny, nasty
little Dennis Darts on it rather than the Citaros. But I think the
demand has increased to the point that deckers are necessary, and they
do fit as I've seen one in service on that route before.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.