On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 09:39:44 -0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

However Stagecoach has run its RML 2760
on the 15 a few times - I have seen it. It will not be allowed to run as
a substitute vehicle from 1/1/2006 without permission from TfL. This is
because it would not meet the contracted emission standards that come
into force from that date for TfL contracted services.


I have not only seen it... I was on it this morning.



--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 21:31:28 -0000, Dockland
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 09:39:44 -0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

However Stagecoach has run its RML 2760
on the 15 a few times - I have seen it. It will not be allowed to run as
a substitute vehicle from 1/1/2006 without permission from TfL. This is
because it would not meet the contracted emission standards that come
into force from that date for TfL contracted services.


I have not only seen it... I was on it this morning.

Maybe I'm in the minority but how can we be commemorating the last RM
in service if there are still two routes running and even an RML from
time to time? At least when the RTs went from Barking that really was
the last day of scheduled RT service.

Paul

Paul wrote:
On Wed, 14 Dec 2005 21:31:28 -0000, Dockland
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 09:39:44 -0000, Paul Corfield
wrote:

However Stagecoach has run its RML 2760
on the 15 a few times - I have seen it. It will not be allowed to run as
a substitute vehicle from 1/1/2006 without permission from TfL. This is
because it would not meet the contracted emission standards that come
into force from that date for TfL contracted services.


I have not only seen it... I was on it this morning.

Maybe I'm in the minority but how can we be commemorating the last RM
in service if there are still two routes running and even an RML from
time to time? At least when the RTs went from Barking that really was
the last day of scheduled RT service.


Because these toytown routes are not services of much real use to
anybody. Just a funfair ride. It is like going on a steam railway -
maybe good fun, and well worth doing, but nothing much like what the
railways used to be. There is no doubt that last week was the end of
proper Routemaster operation, and therefore deserved to be marked.

"umpston" wrote in message
oups.com...

There is no doubt that last week was the end of proper
Routemaster operation, and therefore deserved to be marked.

No-one else seems to have mentioned that there were RTs running up Abbey
Road - I know not whence or whither.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

In message .com,
umpston writes
Because these toytown routes are not services of much real use to
anybody.

Just to make an observation to this:

*Anything* which augments the bus service between Tower Hill and
Trafalgar Square can only be a Good Thing in my view. This much be one
of the worst served (in terms of demand) corridors in Central London.

The "9" would also be handier if it actually went to the South
Kensington Museum, rather than turning around at the Royal Albert hall.
(But I understand that it can't do that because it would then be
providing a service not available by low-floor vehicles.)
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

Ian Jelf wrote:
In message .com,
umpston writes
Because these toytown routes are not services of much real use to
anybody.

Just to make an observation to this:

*Anything* which augments the bus service between Tower Hill and
Trafalgar Square can only be a Good Thing in my view. This much be one
of the worst served (in terms of demand) corridors in Central London.

The "9" would also be handier if it actually went to the South
Kensington Museum, rather than turning around at the Royal Albert hall.
(But I understand that it can't do that because it would then be
providing a service not available by low-floor vehicles.)
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

Ian, indeed, why on Earth doesn't the Disney 9 at least go as far as
High Street Kensington? Terminating in front of the Royal Albert Hall
is utterly ludicrous, with not even an Underground station reasonably
nearby. If it went that far, it would not be contravening the
"disabled" restriction you referred to.

Marc.

In message .com,
" writes

Ian Jelf wrote:
In message .com,
umpston writes
Because these toytown routes are not services of much real use to
anybody.

Just to make an observation to this:

*Anything* which augments the bus service between Tower Hill and
Trafalgar Square can only be a Good Thing in my view. This much be one
of the worst served (in terms of demand) corridors in Central London.

The "9" would also be handier if it actually went to the South
Kensington Museum,
I meant "South Kensington Museum*s*", of course.

rather than turning around at the Royal Albert hall.
(But I understand that it can't do that because it would then be
providing a service not available by low-floor vehicles.)

Ian, indeed, why on Earth doesn't the Disney 9 at least go as far as
High Street Kensington?
Well, I suppose the reason is two-fold: it would require extra vehicles
and it would leave the service susceptible to the vagaries of traffic in
Kensington. It would be a good move, though, provided extra vehicles
could be obtained.

Terminating in front of the Royal Albert Hall
is utterly ludicrous, with not even an Underground station reasonably
nearby.
Actually, though, the absence of an Underground station is a good reason
for *having* a bus, of course. It's just that - outside event times -
the Royal Albert hall as such isn't actually much of a traffic
objective. It just *sounds* like ti is, if you see what I mean.

During daytime hours, Harrod's would have been a better objective but
again we fall into this "not exactly duplicated by another route"
problem.

If it went that far, it would not be contravening the
"disabled" restriction you referred to.
No, quite.

Thinking about this whole issue has prompted me to think what "natural
flows" in Central London ought to have through bus routes. By far the
most obvious is Tower - Fleet Street - Trafalgar Square - Whitehall -
Eye (sort of combining the best bits of the 15 and 11).

It had never occurred to me until recently, either, how useful the 159
is, linking Oxford Street with the Eye via Trafalgar Square, Whitehall
and Westminster. A few Heritage RMs on that section wouldn't go amiss!
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

Yes, Ian, the failure to have Routemasters on that particular route,
via Trafalgar Square, Whitehall, Parliament Square and Westminster
Bridge was something that, in his impromptu interview on top of RM2217,
Peter Hendy was given a particular grilling on Black Friday.

His simplistic reply was "if you think you can make money from such a
route, we'll give you the Routemasters and see if you can make such a
service work. .... Routes 9 and 15 are receiving a £1.5 million subsidy
from T.F.L."

Marc.