(13 Sep 2016, 8:02 pm)Arcticrossy92 wrote

Had a ride on either 3995/3996 (it operated an early out of Consett on the X71 on Monday (6:20 I think) and two things I noticed. 

Internally the seats upstairs are in a right state, I'm very surprised it was allowed to go into service in the condition. With it being an Open Top bus I noticed it didn't have any internal poles and the bells were on the back of the seats (i hadn't seen this before)

I know they're old buses, but think they would look great internally if they had some sort of full refurb, especially the ones on front line services. I understand it may not be viable in the long run, spending money on them, but would be nice from a passenger point of view.

I'm of the same opinion. I'd ridden on a couple of these down in Brighton, shortly before their withdrawal and transfer to Go North East. Having seen the state of some of them down there, I was surprised when they hit the roads up here without a refurb. 

I'm not suggesting all 2nd hand buses should be refurbished as a matter of course, but 3995/6 look especially shabby, and customers aren't daft enough not to notice these things. Having ridden 6132 yesterday, it just goes to show how much difference an internal refurbishment can make to the presentation of a bus.

(13 Sep 2016, 8:26 pm)Adrian wrote I'm of the same opinion. I'd ridden on a couple of these down in Brighton, shortly before their withdrawal and transfer to Go North East. Having seen the state of some of them down there, I was surprised when they hit the roads up here without a refurb. 

I'm not suggesting all 2nd hand buses should be refurbished as a matter of course, but 3995/6 look especially shabby, and customers aren't daft enough not to notice these things. Having ridden 6132 yesterday, it just goes to show how much difference an internal refurbishment can make to the presentation of a bus.

I had 3995 this afternoon on the 15A and it is a absolute mess, at the front over the destination screen panel there was various random assortments of metal and panels that wouldn't normally be there including one crudely fitted panel on the drivers side, making tape on one of the seat legs and of course the typical shabby seats.

Also had 6134 on the X22 this morning which I had to admit looked a lot better with it having the blue panels rather than the drab dark grey panels but still had the shabby red seat moquette which is quite worn and looks a mess.

Had one that has had it seats re-trimmed on the 15 fairly recently and it really did make a difference in the overall appearance of the bus.

(13 Sep 2016, 8:02 pm)Arcticrossy92 wrote

Had a ride on either 3995/3996 (it operated an early out of Consett on the X71 on Monday (6:20 I think) and two things I noticed. 

Internally the seats upstairs are in a right state, I'm very surprised it was allowed to go into service in the condition. With it being an Open Top bus I noticed it didn't have any internal poles and the bells were on the back of the seats (i hadn't seen this before)

I also noticed when it reversed out of Eldon Square it didn't make any noise to warn people, only the reverse light came on.

I'm a big lover of the Omnidekkas and the majority seem in decent condition, find them a lot faster than the rest of Stanleys Deckers. I think the seats being redone makes a massive difference visually, it has on the other ones that have been done. 

I know they're old buses, but think they would look great internally if they had some sort of full refurb, especially the ones on front line services. I understand it may not be viable in the long run, spending money on them, but would be nice from a passenger point of view.

Madness that DDA requirements mean perfectly servicable buses are being scrapped that are in a better condition.  How absence of poles can be allowed for vehicles in regular passenger service is beyond me.   DDA worries about whether fonts on destination displays are uppercase or lower, but not whether passengers have anything substantial to hold onto!

(13 Sep 2016, 9:45 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Madness that DDA requirements mean perfectly servicable buses are being scrapped that are in a better condition.  How absence of poles can be allowed for vehicles in regular passenger service is beyond me.   DDA worries about whether fonts on destination displays are uppercase or lower, but not whether passengers have anything substantial to hold onto!

The purpose of DDA is to serve disabled passengers and not much else. This is a tangeable requirement, can be specified. Quality is nearly impossible to moderate as it's subjective - how on earth would you be able to define what is acceptable or not? It's much a case by case process which would be meaningless. It can be allowed as the buses are functioning, and who cares on a business level any more? The question of whether they are liked or not can't be moderated other than customer service complaints.
There is nothing legally wrong with the buses. I'm no lawyer, but I think it would be impossible to ever make it a legal concern, due to the subjectivity.

(14 Sep 2016, 7:52 am)Jamie M wrote The purpose of DDA is to serve disabled passengers and not much else. This is a tangeable requirement, can be specified. Quality is nearly impossible to moderate as it's subjective - how on earth would you be able to define what is acceptable or not? It's much a case by case process which would be meaningless. It can be allowed as the buses are functioning, and who cares on a business level any more? The question of whether they are liked or not can't be moderated other than customer service complaints.
There is nothing legally wrong with the buses. I'm no lawyer, but I think  it would be impossible to ever make it a legal concern, due to the subjectivity.

What are you banging on about.  The presence (or in this case absence) of grab poles is tangible.

(14 Sep 2016, 1:49 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote What are you banging on about.  The presence (or in this case absence) of grab poles is tangible.

I thought you were referring to the general condition, oh well.

(14 Sep 2016, 1:49 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote What are you banging on about.  The presence (or in this case absence) of grab poles is tangible.

According to text quoted from the DDA thread, the following spec needs following:

Gangways
Width of no less than 450mm upto a height of 1400mm from floor
Width of no less than 550mm at heights above 1400mm from floor
Vertical handrails must be provided along at least one side of gangway, at intervals of not less than 1050mm
Horizontal handrail from the door area to the priority seats, at a height between 800mm-900mm with minimum gaps where possible

Handrails
Horizontal handrail must be provided between 800mm-900mm from the ground on both sides
Horizontal handrail at intervals not more than 300mm from the door area to the designated wheelchair space
Handrails must have a diameter of not less than 30mm, not more than 35mm
No less than 45mm between the handrail and any other part of the vehicle
Contrasting colour

I haven't been on the vehicles in question. I can only go on what has been said here.
Presumably they do meet the spec (or will do in January).

(14 Sep 2016, 2:26 pm)Andreos1 wrote According to text quoted from the DDA thread, the following spec needs following:


I haven't been on the vehicles in question. I can only go on what has been said here.
Presumably they do meet the spec (or will do in January).

Sounds like they aren't currently compliant in that case (no vertical handrails on upper deck).  I did wonder if the regs only aplied to the lower deck or something, though that would seem ridiculous.

Crusader Citaro 5311 is up at Bells incase anyones looking for it

(14 Sep 2016, 2:41 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Sounds like they aren't currently compliant in that case (no vertical handrails on upper deck).  I did wonder if the regs only aplied to the lower deck or something, though that would seem ridiculous.

3996 interior shot


Bus Interiors: Go North East: 3996 GX03STZ Scania N94UD Omnidekka by emdjt42, on Flickr

(14 Sep 2016, 2:41 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Sounds like they aren't currently compliant in that case (no vertical handrails on upper deck).  I did wonder if the regs only aplied to the lower deck or something, though that would seem ridiculous.

Surely they are compliant as technically it is an open top bus albeit a covertable one. Do the regulations state that all open toppers now have to have to have handrails just pointing to the sky...? Least the seats have handles to grab onto

Why do Washington do some 39s surely there's a Deptford service it can run off or can they not just provide a bus

(14 Sep 2016, 6:14 pm)Adrian wrote 3996 interior shot


Bus Interiors: Go North East: 3996 GX03STZ Scania N94UD Omnidekka by emdjt42, on Flickr

Didn't realise the stairwell protruded so far into the aisle either (unless its the angle of the shot).  I thought there were minimum gangway widths associated with DDA also.

(14 Sep 2016, 6:23 pm)Acky81 wrote Why do Washington do some 39s surely there's a Deptford service it can run off or can they not just provide a bus

Washington do the runs as they end up on there after doing scholars.  Deptford used to operate the scholars but now Washington do hence why they do a run a the 39's.  It was mean't to be a run on the 2's but for obvious reasons Double deckers can't operate the 2's to Washington.

Two GNE vehicles on their way down A1 this afternoon, courtesy of Trevor Wigley... UID red MPD and a Loyne Trident (original trim one).

(15 Sep 2016, 4:37 pm)RBZ 5459 wrote Two GNE vehicles on their way down A1 this afternoon, courtesy of Trevor Wigley... UID red MPD and a Loyne Trident (original trim one).

I believe 551 and 3875 were due to be collected by Trevor Wigley today from Chester-le-Street.

(15 Sep 2016, 4:42 pm)Dan wrote I believe 551 and 3875 were due to be collected by Trevor Wigley today from Chester-le-Street.

Confirmed, they left earlier on today.

Not sure if already noted but 559 is now at Riverside and operated the 554 this morning

3875 was better to drive than 3872... which still survives.

3872 must be in better mechanical condition


Dan has any of 701 - 4 been painted yet

(15 Sep 2016, 6:31 pm)pdiddy wrote 3875 was better to drive than 3872... which still survives.

3872 must be in better mechanical condition


Dan has any of 701 - 4 been painted yet

Wouldn't be so sure, been told it failed on 14/X22 yesterday.

(15 Sep 2016, 6:31 pm)pdiddy wrote 3875 was better to drive than 3872... which still survives.

3872 must be in better mechanical condition


Dan has any of 701 - 4 been painted yet

Don't think so.

It will be next month before they enter service.

(15 Sep 2016, 6:31 pm)pdiddy wrote 3875 was better to drive than 3872... which still survives.

3872 must be in better mechanical condition


Dan has any of 701 - 4 been painted yet

3875 was seemingly loathed throughout the depot. 3872 has a working kickdown at least while 3875 didn't, and would regularly incur faults from just a day out on the road.

Does positioning out or in from the start or end of a running board to and from the depot (morning or evening) count as driving hours of the purposes of Domestic Driving Hours (5hr 30m)?

(15 Sep 2016, 6:57 pm)L469 YVK wrote Does positioning out or in from the start or end of a running board to and from the depot (morning or evening) count as driving hours of the purposes of Domestic Driving Hours (5hr 30m)?

Yes

(15 Sep 2016, 6:31 pm)pdiddy wrote Dan has any of 701 - 4 been painted yet

Two of them were being worked on when I paid a brief visit on Tuesday. IIRC 701 had most of the nearside panels removed, and I think another one was being rubbed down. The other 2, one is being parked at the side of Saltmeadows, whilst the other one is around the back.

Has 3983 transferred to Riverside, or was it just loaned out? Seen on the 10A yesterday.


Go North East - 3983 - PJ02PZL by aureolindn, on Flickr

(15 Sep 2016, 8:57 pm)Adrian wrote Has 3983 transferred to Riverside, or was it just loaned out? Seen on the 10A yesterday.


Go North East - 3983 - PJ02PZL by aureolindn, on Flickr

I believe it was transferred over with an omnidekka being brought in or something? Remember seeing transferred and that id. Been on that bus on the 10A quite a few times in the past 2 weeks.

(15 Sep 2016, 9:19 pm)Jamie M wrote I believe it was transferred over with an omnidekka being brought in or something? Remember seeing transferred and that id. Been on that bus on the 10A quite a few times in the past 2 weeks.

Yeah it transferred over to Riverside a few weeks ago now. GNE noted it on their fleet update for the w/b 15th August. It does, however, yet to be shown as transferred on the NEB fleet lists.

(15 Sep 2016, 9:19 pm)Jamie M wrote I believe it was transferred over with an omnidekka being brought in or something? Remember seeing transferred and that id. Been on that bus on the 10A quite a few times in the past 2 weeks.

Aye, you're right looking at the fleet archive on GNE's website. Went on the 15th August update!

Lovely ride on 6022 from Chester to Newcastle on the 21 today....if any engineers from GNE visit this page....no, I've no idea where the 2nd gear was either.

To think my employer pays nigh on a grand a year for this....Angel guarantee please