(25/02/2013 19:12)CX06 EBK Wrote: [ -> ] (25/02/2013 18:59)jtd508110 Wrote: [ -> ]I have to say, I agree with 3111 that I would rather wait 5 mins for a low floor bus than 30 mins. Besides, I dont see many prams on an 86 either.
That is a poor excuse for an Olympian being on one of these services. I see prams on the 86 regularly and I'm sure many other routes do. These routes are meant to be "Quality" Bus Partnerships and they see breaches every day from both sides, weather it be these Olympians from Arriva or SPDs from Stagecoach. Breaches are breaches. Just seems like both bus companies have adopted the Merseytravel mentality of not giving a damn about it.
Even if SPDs are a breach of so-called QBP regulations, they offer a slight increase in capacity. Personally, I see no problem with them being on such services (especially the 82/86 - an improvement over the smaller [but newer] Darts).
It's a difficult situation. There's one thing that we can all agree on - the Palatine 2s have outstayed their welcome.
The obvious solution is to actually have buses which are to the required capacity standard. The Enviros are more suited yet they are much rarer than the SPDs which are daily allocations to the 82/6. Why did either company agree if they never meet the supposed requirements? A pointless exercise which as just made services on the whole worse across the board.
Was the idea for Quality Bus partnership , just lip service by the operators to prevent Merseytravel from introducing a more draconian set of regulations as im sure the new transport act could of allowed them Merseytravel to introduce a system similar to london , which neither Stagecoach or arriva really wants .
I don't have a major issue with an SPD on a QPB route as ultimately it is still low floor, not ideal but still, however really the olympians should not be seeing use on such routes. Really ideally they should mainly be used on the 699 but then there will also be the odd student with a wheelchair.
(25/02/2013 19:31)wirralbus Wrote: [ -> ]Was the idea for Quality Bus partnership , just lip service by the operators to prevent Merseytravel from introducing a more draconian set of regulations as im sure the new transport act could of allowed them Merseytravel to introduce a system similar to london , which neither Stagecoach or arriva really wants .
Would be a good idea to have the system similar to London from Merseytravel tbh. We may not end up either tin canned like Sardines on a Stagecoach Dart or waiting 20minutes for 4 buses to come in a convoy, don't get me started with QBP on Sundays.
6014 seems to have some unusual reel of wire trailing from the bonnet I noted , don't know if anyone else spotted this
I liked travelling on the N reg Olympians over the water, but not a fan of the later R reg busses. However as a regular user of the 86, I think it would be appropriate to aquire some more busses, old or new and have the 86 and 80 as entirely double deck operations as the demand is definitely there.
The SPD's are Euro 2? and therefore do not breach any contract.
QBPs have a Euro 3 requirement do they not?
(26/02/2013 00:40)Raawwwrrr! Wrote: [ -> ]The SPD's are Euro 2? and therefore do not breach any contract.
No side or rear destinations which I am pretty certain falls short of the requirements. That would also knock the Tridents out too but have to take what you can when it comes to Stagecoach deckers. Either way, the SPDs are not great capacity wise but hardly anything Stagecoach put on the 82/6 is bar the deckers. Same can be said for other QBPs but that applies for both operators in many cases.
Just for a degree of clarification, these are the vehicle requirements lifted from the contract on the 14. I can't see it being too dissimilar for other routes within the QBP network with, perhaps, the exception of the date restriction for GPS equipment.
Quote:Vehicle Standards
1.1 All vehicles used in the provision of Local Services will:
1.1.1 be to a low floor design and DDA complaint as more particularly required by the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000;
1.1.2 meet at least Euro 3 emission standards (or equivalent);
1.1.3 have working front, nearside and rear; analogue or digital route number and destination displays (to DDA specification);
1.1.4 have internal cameras sufficient to provide coverage of the entire seated area on each deck and at least one camera covering the passenger/platform area, in each case with the facility to record to the standards required for tamper-proof evidence;
1.1.5 have forward facing cameras and showing vehicle sides with the facility to record to the standards required for tamper-proof evidence;
1.1.6 be cleaned daily both internally and externally prior to entry into service save in circumstances where it would be dangerous to do so, including extreme weather conditions;
1.1.7 have visible internal branding referring to the Quality Bus Partnership, save that such branding shall not be of a scale which materially adversely affects advertising revenue, or potential advertising revenue, on such Local Services.
1.1.8 have a GPS system by 31 December 2012 which provides the real time position of their vehicle via WGS84 standard co-ordinates for latitude and longitude to a precision of 10 metres; and the transmission of the real time position of the bus to MPTE’s Central RTI System via the RTIG Digital Air Interface Protocol (RTIGT030 standard) with a minimum 15 second update frequency.