(15 Feb 2024, 9:46 pm)Ambassador wrote What is the actual issue with the Angel Streetdecks? The allocation of the Angels to the 51/2/93/94 seems deliberate now to keep them vaguely near Rvierside.

Whilst I trundle through low fell at a top speed of 25mph, my leg propped on that weird box on the upper left side deck of the ex London tat, cursing Wright and Riverside under my breath

(15 Feb 2024, 11:02 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Gotta make a case for some new leccy buses.

(15 Feb 2024, 9:46 pm)Ambassador wrote What is the actual issue with the Angel Streetdecks? The allocation of the Angels to the 51/2/93/94 seems deliberate now to keep them vaguely near Rvierside.

Whilst I trundle through low fell at a top speed of 25mph, my leg propped on that weird box on the upper left side deck of the ex London tat, cursing Wright and Riverside under my breath

(16 Feb 2024, 9:49 am)NL62WVW wrote The engineer that came out to me yesterday told me it's a sensor fault on the emissions system.

Basically what happens is the ECU detects a fault with the emissions system and logs it, after about 100 miles the engine will go into limp mode with a maximum speed of 10 mph.

There reason they are kept on 51/51/93/94 is because ifs quicker for engineers to get to them rather than travelling to Durham/Bishop to reset them with the laptop

(16 Feb 2024, 10:42 am)streetdeckfan wrote Given they use a Mercedes engine, I'd hazard a guess and say it's either the pressure sensor on the DPF or the pressure transducer for the EGR valve. They're common issues on Mercedes cars (and our diesel Smart car!). 

In our case, when the error pops up it won't let you rev past 2.5k and you get no boost.

(16 Feb 2024, 11:02 am)NL62WVW wrote The DPF is causing issues on some of the 67 plate ones at the minute too, constantly failing to do a regeneration cycle which causes all sorts of dash lights to come on. Them ones normally get parked up in the corner of the Voltra park and have a forced regen done on the laptop

The 20/70 plates are common ones for going into limp mode at the minute, the 6356- 6363 batch are absolutely appalling vehicles to drive considering their ages.

(16 Feb 2024, 11:22 am)L469 YVK wrote Then why are 6356-63 on the X21? The dead mileage and recovery costs must be high especially all the way in the Wear Valley.

At least if they were on the X71/X72 or any other Derwent to Newcastle service such as the Sunday X45/X72 cycle, Consett or Riverside could easily pick them up.

With 6377 and 6102 thrown into the mix, it's definitely possible to change the allocation on the X21 to E400MMCs (including more choice for the X10) and still keep the X30/X31/X45 working pattern with suitable low height spares.

(16 Feb 2024, 11:34 am)Dan wrote They’re on that service because that’s what the business has decided to do.

The answer to buses being unreliable cannot always be to move them onto another service. The answer is to fix them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(16 Feb 2024, 2:20 pm)mb134 wrote The ex-London B9TLs don't seem to be fantastic deputies on the X21 for the broken StreetDecks. I had 6229 south this morning and, while fine before the A1(M) stretch, it seemed to top out at just over 40 mph on the A1M which cannot be helping with timekeeping.

The NSAs were also promoting WiFi and USBs for the duration of my trip, which obviously weren't present on that vehicle.

(16 Feb 2024, 3:24 pm)Ambassador wrote Yeah seems a common theme. 

Just seen a Versa (didn't catch the number) leave Gateshead full and standing en route to Brandon 

Ironically sandwiched between 3 empty Angel streetdecks on the 27, 94 and 58

(22 Feb 2024, 10:20 am)Iamtheone8483748 wrote If bustimes is to be believed there's also an E200MMC on the 8.

(22 Feb 2024, 10:20 am)Iamtheone8483748 wrote If bustimes is to be believed there's also an E200MMC on the 8.

(26 Feb 2024, 8:58 am)itsadam wrote To my dismay this morning, I got a solo on the 50. I was hoping that it was some sort of joke however, to my horror, it wasn't and it was jam packed. One stupid allocation and the driver kept letting people on even though there was hardly any room. I don't suppose drivers are trained to stop letting passengers on at a certain point but a bit of discretion for passenger comfort would be greatly appreciated.

(26 Feb 2024, 8:58 am)itsadam wrote To my dismay this morning, I got a solo on the 50. I was hoping that it was some sort of joke however, to my horror, it wasn't and it was jam packed. One stupid allocation and the driver kept letting people on even though there was hardly any room. I don't suppose drivers are trained to stop letting passengers on at a certain point but a bit of discretion for passenger comfort would be greatly appreciated.

(26 Feb 2024, 9:08 am)mb134 wrote Drivers are trained to stop letting passengers on at a certain point, and there's a legal limit per vehicle of how many they can carry. So that they're not stranding people at bus stops, they'll take as many as they deem safe to carry (within the legal limit).

(26 Feb 2024, 11:05 am)Ambassador wrote However I've noticed they seem to have entirely stopped enforcing no standing on the stairs or upper deck

(26 Feb 2024, 8:59 pm)Unber43 wrote Is it worth all the aggravation?

(26 Feb 2024, 11:05 am)Ambassador wrote However I've noticed they seem to have entirely stopped enforcing no standing on the stairs or upper deck

(26 Feb 2024, 8:59 pm)Unber43 wrote Is it worth all the aggravation?

(26 Feb 2024, 10:27 pm)mb134 wrote Which is mental given that it alters the centre of gravity, and if there's a load stood upstairs and the driver takes a bend a bit too hard...

---

A few annoyed (likely drunk) passengers is nothing in comparison to what could happen if there were too many stood upstairs. 

Handbrake on, engine off, they'll soon get the message to shift downstairs.