(31 Dec 2015, 2:24 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]It'll be interesting to see if any depots send non-compliant vehicles out on the 2nd. If the worst comes to the worst, do they send a bus with a knackered rear destination out, or just bite the bullet and record the lost mileage?
Have you been round the depots to do an audit, Dan? I'd noticed a MAN yesterday, where the illumination on the front flipdot wasn't working. That wouldn't be 'ready', would it?
Arriva will most likely do so, there is at least one MAX Omnicity at Darlington with broke side and rear screens, 1521's side screen wasn't working yesterday and I think 1799 has neither side or rear destination equipment (rear power blinds).
(31 Dec 2015, 2:27 pm)DanPicken wrote [ -> ]BIB#1 They'd probably just send it out as otherwise some services could have a limited service.
BIB#2 No, I haven't but thats one compared to the amount GNE/ANE have.
Do you have a figure that you can put on how many they have, compared to what Stagecoach have?
(31 Dec 2015, 2:24 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]It'll be interesting to see if any depots send non-compliant vehicles out on the 2nd. If the worst comes to the worst, do they send a bus with a knackered rear destination out, or just bite the bullet and record the lost mileage?
On paper, it should render the bus unfit for service. In reality, I can't see that being the case!
I'm all for making public transport more accessible, but I think that most disabled passengers would prefer the bus to turn up, instead of them being left there at a bus stop in the freezing cold while the bus that should have turned up is VOR due to a side or rear destination display not working.
(31 Dec 2015, 2:27 pm)DanPicken wrote [ -> ]BIB#2 No, I haven't but thats one compared to the amount GNE/ANE have.
So Stagecoach aren't 100% ready, then?
(15 Aug 2015, 2:54 pm)DaveyBowyer wrote [ -> ]I don't think DDA is affecting the bus industry too much. I'd say that:
- High fuel costs
- Euro emission laws
Are affecting the industry. If the D10-245 was mounted into a Gemini 2 body with a ZF Ecomat, you'd have the perfect bus that could do everything from a short hop around the Toon to a (100?) mile stint to Berwick with ease.
High fuel costs mean that buses need to be more fuel efficient in order to remain affordable for customers. Unforunately, you can't keep living in the past, because it's unlikely to change.
(31 Dec 2015, 2:39 pm)DanPicken wrote [ -> ]99.98% ready.
Ah; so you must have a figure at hand to answer Adrian's question, if you're able to provide a percentage!
(31 Dec 2015, 2:35 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Do you have a figure that you can put on how many they have, compared to what Stagecoach have?
Stagecoach have 1. That we know of.
(31 Dec 2015, 2:42 pm)DanPicken wrote [ -> ]Stagecoach have 1. That we know of.
'That we know of' - those are the key words! Whilst Stagecoach undeniably have fewer examples of destinations not working, they definitely do have more than one...
Anything can be made to look good as a percentage. For your information; one vehicle in the fleet of Busways' 385 without a full compliment of working destinations would be 99.25% working - not 99.98%.
(31 Dec 2015, 2:49 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]'That we know of' - those are the key words! Whilst Stagecoach undeniably have fewer examples of destinations not working, they definitely do have more than one...
Anything can be made to look good as a percentage. For your information; one vehicle in the fleet of Busways' 385 without a full compliment of working destinations would be 99.25% working - not 99.98%.
Not good with counting...
Just today, I noticed a Streetlite on an X3A, having a rear blind OOA.
I think it was 6028, but it was displaying 'Easington Lane' earlier.
edit: It appears underline doesn't work. Either way, the 'Easing' part of Easington, was underlined.
(31 Dec 2015, 3:25 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]I think it was 6028, but it was displaying 'Easington Lane' earlier.
edit: It appears underline doesn't work. Either way, the 'Easing' part of Easington, was underlined.
Yes, it's 6028 with that issue (see photo below). It developed the fault in the summer of 2014 and hasn't been fixed yet - Hanover need to come out and look at replacing the panel of LEDs it affects. The colour panel has also developed a problem since, which is why some red LEDs are shown in the route number (not shown on the photo below).
![[Image: 16559047459_373146fb22.jpg]](https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7620/16559047459_373146fb22.jpg)
Go North East: 6028 / V328LGC by
Daniel Graham, on Flickr
Most of Travelsure's vehicles weren't displaying destinations on Wednesday, just a board in the window. Only saw one working.
(31 Dec 2015, 2:24 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]It'll be interesting to see if any depots send non-compliant vehicles out on the 2nd. If the worst comes to the worst, do they send a bus with a knackered rear destination out, or just bite the bullet and record the lost mileage?
Have you been round the depots to do an audit, Dan? I'd noticed a MAN yesterday, where the illumination on the front flipdot wasn't working. That wouldn't be 'ready', would it?
The number on the front of the whey aye five o (5256) we caught the other day was flickering. We did mention it to the driver, but got a blank look.
(01 Jan 2016, 8:00 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]Ta
From tomorrow 2nd Jan....
What happens if for eg.
Scarlet Band have a bus out that's not DDA say with the destination number on the wrong side
Do they get fined!!!
(01 Jan 2016, 9:08 pm)pdiddy wrote [ -> ]From tomorrow 2nd Jan....
What happens if for eg.
Scarlet Band have a bus out that's not DDA say with the destination number on the wrong side
Do they get fined!!!
I cannot remember if the number on the nearside comes under a 'regulation' or 'best practice'.
If its under best practice, then no, but if it is a regulation, then possible, but I doubt they will get fined (or any other operator) in the first instance.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:13 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]How would it be policed?
DVSA Officials.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:13 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]How would it be policed?
DVSA should be policing it through spot checks. Not sure whether this will also be covered as part of an MOT going forward though?
It's always going to be a case that people will report it too, so I can't see any operators running the risk.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:16 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]I cannot remember if the number on the nearside comes under a 'regulation' or 'best practice'.
If its under best practice, then no, but if it is a regulation, then possible, but I doubt they will get fined (or any other operator) in the first instance.
VOSA Officials.
I believe it says that the number 'should' be on the nearside.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:19 pm)LeeCalder wrote [ -> ]I believe it says that the number 'should' be on the nearside.
Trent Barton aren't good at that I know alot of theirs are/were on the wrong side.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:16 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]I cannot remember if the number on the nearside comes under a 'regulation' or 'best practice'.
If its under best practice, then no, but if it is a regulation, then possible, but I doubt they will get fined (or any other operator) in the first instance.
DVSA Officials.
I wonder how Trent Barton will get away with not displaying a route number at all?
Apparently it is DDA, because they don't have route numbers they replace it mainly with an abbreviation of the brand name and then the places served.
TransPeak do the same, with the abbreviation as TP.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:16 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]I cannot remember if the number on the nearside comes under a 'regulation' or 'best practice'.
If its under best practice, then no, but if it is a regulation, then possible, but I doubt they will get fined (or any other operator) in the first instance.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:19 pm)LeeCalder wrote [ -> ]I believe it says that the number 'should' be on the nearside.
I have found it....it is under best practice:
Best Practice
A good destination and route number display will be clearly legible by day and night and commercial advertising should not detract from them. A consistent display design is also helpful, therefore the route number should always be to the right of the destination when viewed. Other major points on the route can be included but they should not detract from the clarity of the ultimate destination. Destination displays which simultaneously show both ends of a route are confusing and should be avoided. The destination appropriate to the direction of travel should be displayed or if a circular route such information necessary to identify the direction of travel.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:21 pm)DanPicken wrote [ -> ]Trent Barton aren't good at that I know alot of theirs are/were on the wrong side.
A lot of them? There are only seven routes with numbers...
(01 Jan 2016, 9:17 pm)He Adrian wrote [ -> ]DVSA should be policing it through spot checks. Not sure whether this will also be covered as part of an MOT going forward though?
It's always going to be a case that people will report it too, so I can't see any operators running the risk.
I can see how reports will be made, though I'm doubting most of joe public will even aware of the requirements.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:22 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]I wonder how Trent Barton will get away with not displaying a route number at all?
The route will not be registered with a route number.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:26 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]I can see how reports will be made, though I'm doubting most of joe public will even aware of the requirements.
It'll be spotters that do it.
(01 Jan 2016, 9:26 pm)LeeCalder wrote [ -> ]A lot of them? There are only seven routes with numbers...
With however many buses allocated.
