How old should buses be at withdrawal.

[Seacook]

If properly maintained buses are fine for 10 to 20 years. However i would like to see operators keeping the same vehicles on the same routes and not cascading them when new ones are bought. A policy of putting new buses on premium routes means that some areas never get new transport - fifteen or twenty year old buses may get replaced but only by those which have been in service for seven to ten years .

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

If properly maintained buses are fine for 10 to 20 years. However i would like to see operators keeping the same vehicles on the same routes and not cascading them when new ones are bought. A policy of putting new buses on premium routes means that some areas never get new transport - fifteen or twenty year old buses may get replaced but only by those which have been in service for seven to ten years .

However, then you end up with routes that make no money getting new fleet whilst those that do make money have to get by with old fleet. Cascading is as old as the hills

 

[Busaholic]

There is a huge debate going on right now about re-regulation, 'quality contracts' and suchlike within some metropolitan areas, in particular Greater Manchester and Tyneside, with politicians of all colours queueing up to play at running bus services. Some large operators, most notably Stagecoach, are not only refusing to play ball but threatening to pull out altogether if too much influence/power is ceded. Among proposals at Nexus (Tyneside/Wearside) would be the power for the Transport Authority to dictate the type of vehicles to be used on a particular route, down to the maximum age of the vehicle, even on a route receiving no public subsidy. In other words, a mini-London situation would be created, but with the ability of politicians not only to influence general thinking but to interfere with the operation of services in order to score cheap political points. It could be there are sufficient men and women with actual operational experience to staff these transport authorities, but I would be very sceptical about that being the case.

 

[radamfi]

There is a huge debate going on right now about re-regulation, 'quality contracts' and suchlike within some metropolitan areas, in particular Greater Manchester and Tyneside, with politicians of all colours queueing up to play at running bus services. Some large operators, most notably Stagecoach, are not only refusing to play ball but threatening to pull out altogether if too much influence/power is ceded. Among proposals at Nexus (Tyneside/Wearside) would be the power for the Transport Authority to dictate the type of vehicles to be used on a particular route, down to the maximum age of the vehicle, even on a route receiving no public subsidy. In other words, a mini-London situation would be created, but with the ability of politicians not only to influence general thinking but to interfere with the operation of services in order to score cheap political points. It could be there are sufficient men and women with actual operational experience to staff these transport authorities, but I would be very sceptical about that being the case.

Did you mean to post this in a different thread, as it is a huge tangent to what came before?

GM was probably the least vocal metropolitan area on Quality Contracts or similar, but have been offered bus powers as a small part of a wider devolution package.

I don't understand why you seem so surprised that a transport authority might actually have a say in what vehicles are used. I think the average man in the street would actually be more surprised that they don't at the moment. Every other western country seems to manage it.

 

[Statto]

Yorkshire Coastliner is a weird one, buses only last 3 years, although they're cascaded to other parts of Transdev Blazefield group, but buses can last 15-20 years if they're looked after properly, GTL Transport had Titans in normal service 25 years old when Stagecoach brought them.

 

[Andyh82]

Yorkshire Coastliner is a weird one, buses only last 3 years, although they're cascaded to other parts of Transdev Blazefield group, but buses can last 15-20 years if they're looked after properly, GTL Transport had Titans in normal service 25 years old when Stagecoach brought them.

That was the policy under Blazefield, but not now under Transdev, half the Coastliner fleet is 7 years old with no sign of replacement.

 

[Busaholic]

Did you mean to post this in a different thread, as it is a huge tangent to what came before?

GM was probably the least vocal metropolitan area on Quality Contracts or similar, but have been offered bus powers as a small part of a wider devolution package.

I don't understand why you seem so surprised that a transport authority might actually have a say in what vehicles are used. I think the average man in the street would actually be more surprised that they don't at the moment. Every other western country seems to manage it.

I felt the comments I made were pertinent to the thread, as almost all new buses are allocated to urban areas in the first instance. Their longevity there has an impact on the rest of a nationwide fleet in cascade terms. The more new buses an operator is 'forced' to buy or lease, so the average age of the whole fleet should decrease, and mean that unless a particular model has stood up well to the stresses and strains of fifteen to twenty years service, then examples of them should become few and far between.

I wasn't intending to develop the theme of transport authorities on this thread beyond the bare bones. Greater Manchester were always in line to get more powers, not least because of the great success of Metrolink, so they weren't campaigning on the same lines as Nexus.

You misunderstand me if you think I'm against transport authorities per se - what I am against is half-cocked schemes where some grandstanding politicians or public officials drafted in from checking Housing Benefits, or whatever, rule the roost and dictate to operators running routes commercially on what they can and cannot do. Mayors can be even worse of course, claiming they have the democratic right, etc etc, when they may only have been voted for by 20% of the electorate max. Bus lanes and Liverpool come to mind too.

The London system works pretty well IMO, the salient fact being that it was the only place in Britain where deregulation did not take place.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I felt the comments I made were pertinent to the thread, as almost all new buses are allocated to urban areas in the first instance. Their longevity there has an impact on the rest of a nationwide fleet in cascade terms. The more new buses an operator is 'forced' to buy or lease, so the average age of the whole fleet should decrease, and mean that unless a particular model has stood up well to the stresses and strains of fifteen to twenty years service, then examples of them should become few and far between.

I wasn't intending to develop the theme of transport authorities on this thread beyond the bare bones. Greater Manchester were always in line to get more powers, not least because of the great success of Metrolink, so they weren't campaigning on the same lines as Nexus.

You misunderstand me if you think I'm against transport authorities per se - what I am against is half-cocked schemes where some grandstanding politicians or public officials drafted in from checking Housing Benefits, or whatever, rule the roost and dictate to operators running routes commercially on what they can and cannot do. Mayors can be even worse of course, claiming they have the democratic right, etc etc, when they may only have been voted for by 20% of the electorate max. Bus lanes and Liverpool come to mind too.

The London system works pretty well IMO, the salient fact being that it was the only place in Britain where deregulation did not take place.

Deregulation is also alive and well in Northern Ireland where ridership has fallen by 24% since 1986. It is not regulation that is behind London's system but the huge level of financial support that it is afforded.

Back to the question in hand..... more specifically about "more new buses" that an operator is forced to buy. In all of this is the question of expenditure - who pays for an average fleet age of 10 or 12 years? Of course, the usual suspects will say (boo hiss) the fat profits of the bloated multinationals.....
This will be the same profit margin that will also fund more bus services, and a uniform pay structure for all staff.

What it won't be is any money coming from whichever government appears in May's election and THAT is the real issue.

However, back onto the subject in more definite terms.... The usual guide in the industry was usually about 15 years to depreciate a single or double deck vehicle, though the DD would usually be expected to last a little longer for schools etc. Minibuses (of the van derived era) had a lifespan of 5-7 years but the appearance of the Metrorider and Solo saw that extend so that Solos are now nearer the 15 year life span too.

The Bristol LH had a design life of c.7-8 years but in the North East, they easily went past that (even before dereg) and some racked up 19 years on front line service

 

[radamfi]

Northern Ireland though does not have tendering. Maybe patronage in the province may not have fallen as much with London style tendering.

As discussed at great length previously, public transport in London does NOT have a high subsidy level. It is only high compared to the rest of the UK. It is paltry compared to most other world cities.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The older the better - none of this low floor rubbish !

I'll settle for an RT, RM, BL/Reliance/Swift etc any day over this modern rubbish that have awful, uncomfortable seating and excessive noise. I'd even settle for a 1970s Leyland National or 1980s Metrobus/Titan

I can't stand the new buses of today...

 

[Busaholic]

Northern Ireland though does not have tendering. Maybe patronage in the province may not have fallen as much with London style tendering.

As discussed at great length previously, public transport in London does NOT have a high subsidy level. It is only high compared to the rest of the UK. It is paltry compared to most other world cities.

I agree with you on that.

I deliberately said British deregulation rather than U.K. deregulation because I was aware that Northern Ireland was different on this as on so much else, and to be honest I don't pay much heed to bus services there. Must say though that Belfast used to have some impressive trolleybuses, although I've only seen them in photos and the odd video clip. Trolleybuses of course should last a heck of a time as there's so little built-in obsolescence compared to a bus, as long as the body is sound.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Northern Ireland though does not have tendering. Maybe patronage in the province may not have fallen as much with London style tendering.

As discussed at great length previously, public transport in London does NOT have a high subsidy level. It is only high compared to the rest of the UK. It is paltry compared to most other world cities.

Yes, but the question was about regulation. The fact that it's not tendered is irrelevant.

As for London, again the OP was talking about comparing London with the UK not other world cities.

I'd like to see more spending on buses. Sadly, in the UK, we focus on trains (cos they're sexy and middle class) but not buses. And if you think that's going to change anytime soon, I suggest you look at the latest proposals for cuts in tendered services from Devon and Derbyshire.

 

[richw]

As long as they are running reliably.

First Cornwalls 19 year old Marshall Dart appears to be one of the most reliable vehicles in the fleet, even against the much newer Enviros which always seem to have a mechanic at the wheel!

 

[neilmc]

There is a huge debate going on right now about re-regulation, 'quality contracts' and suchlike within some metropolitan areas, in particular Greater Manchester and Tyneside, with politicians of all colours queueing up to play at running bus services. Some large operators, most notably Stagecoach, are not only refusing to play ball but threatening to pull out altogether if too much influence/power is ceded. Among proposals at Nexus (Tyneside/Wearside) would be the power for the Transport Authority to dictate the type of vehicles to be used on a particular route, down to the maximum age of the vehicle, even on a route receiving no public subsidy. In other words, a mini-London situation would be created, but with the ability of politicians not only to influence general thinking but to interfere with the operation of services in order to score cheap political points. It could be there are sufficient men and women with actual operational experience to staff these transport authorities, but I would be very sceptical about that being the case.

I would very much like a "mini-London" situation in Manchester, with a common livery, regulated fares, continental-style inter-availability of tickets between bus, train and tram and not least a requirement for any company tendering for a route to have to offer at least a basic evening and Sunday frequency. In South Manchester Stagecoach simply withdraw from many areas after the evening peak which IMO is unacceptable. But at least the fleet is fairly modern.

 

[northwichcat]

I would very much like a "mini-London" situation in Manchester, with a common livery, regulated fares, continental-style inter-availability of tickets between bus, train and tram and not least a requirement for any company tendering for a route to have to offer at least a basic evening and Sunday frequency. In South Manchester Stagecoach simply withdraw from many areas after the evening peak which IMO is unacceptable. But at least the fleet is fairly modern.

I'm unsure of the exact situation in London. However, what would happen when contracted services awarded by non-Greater Manchester councils extend in to Greater Manchester? For instance, the 200 Wilmslow-Manchester Airport service is a Cheshire East council contracted service operated by Vale Travel (GHA Coaches.)

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I would very much like a "mini-London" situation in Manchester, with a common livery, regulated fares, continental-style inter-availability of tickets between bus, train and tram and not least a requirement for any company tendering for a route to have to offer at least a basic evening and Sunday frequency. In South Manchester Stagecoach simply withdraw from many areas after the evening peak which IMO is unacceptable. But at least the fleet is fairly modern.

That's all lovely - who's paying for that? Of course, I'm sure that they'll be a load of funding for that in today's budget
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As long as they are running reliably.

First Cornwalls 19 year old Marshall Dart appears to be one of the most reliable vehicles in the fleet, even against the much newer Enviros which always seem to have a mechanic at the wheel!

Again, the deep South West has long had a record in having the oldest fleet because the operating territory is so thin.

In the 1970's, Western National were still operating Bristol LS's when United were about to withdraw their last Bristol MWs. Similarly, life expired Atlanteans were sent from M&D and Trent to replace elderly Lodekkas (and hasten OMO as it was then called).

In the 1980's, the NBC had a policy of cascading mid life vehicles from northern fleets (e.g. VRs from United, Northern, West Riding, Yorkshire Traction among others, and Nationals from Midland Red East) to WNOC and BOC.

It's simple economics!

 

[Qwerty133]

As long as they are running reliably.

First Cornwalls 19 year old Marshall Dart appears to be one of the most reliable vehicles in the fleet, even against the much newer Enviros which always seem to have a mechanic at the wheel!

But if that's anything like the Arriva Wigston fleet the most reliable break down twice a week...

 

[Robertj21a]

But if that's anything like the Arriva Wigston fleet the most reliable break down twice a week...

Totally inaccurate, as were your previous posts on much the same subject.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

As long as they are running reliably.

First Cornwalls 19 year old Marshall Dart appears to be one of the most reliable vehicles in the fleet, even against the much newer Enviros which always seem to have a mechanic at the wheel!

There's probably a lot less electronic stuff in that one, so less to go wrong.

Any bus with a step at the door should be gone by now. It's probably down to the mileage a bus clocks up and the terrain it covers. A bus that does high mileage over bumpy terrain is going to need replacing sooner then one that does lower mileage or runs over smoother roads

 

[iantherev]

The vehicle in question is an early low floor vehicle so can be used until 31 December. It was also used on intensive London services when new.

 

[Qwerty133]

Totally inaccurate, as were your previous posts on much the same subject.

and you'd know because...
OK twice a week may be a slight exaggeration, but as someone who uses at least 20 South Wigston buses most weeks, I'd think I'd be more aware of break downs than someone whose half way across the UK. In fact I've seen 2 South wigston break downs just today (along with a hinckley bus breakdown).

 

[Busaholic]

The vehicle in question is an early low floor vehicle so can be used until 31 December. It was also used on intensive London services when new.

I understand another member of the class has been transferred back to Camborne. They were used to convert Routemaster routes 28 and 31 to opo without much augmentation and, in consequence, they'd be full and standing for the majority of the working day,so they were worked exceedingly hard, admittedly on fairly flat terrain.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I understand another member of the class has been transferred back to Camborne. They were used to convert Routemaster routes 28 and 31 to opo without much augmentation and, in consequence, they'd be full and standing for the majority of the working day,so they were worked exceedingly hard, admittedly on fairly flat terrain.

Think you've missed a batch.... The F-XMS Mercedes minis were used to convert the 28/31 to Gold Arrow from RMs. Of course, some of that batch did end up in Cornwall.

 

[Robertj21a]

and you'd know because...
OK twice a week may be a slight exaggeration, but as someone who uses at least 20 South Wigston buses most weeks, I'd think I'd be more aware of break downs than someone whose half way across the UK. In fact I've seen 2 South wigston break downs just today (along with a hinckley bus breakdown).

Yes, I would know. Otherwise I might not realise that you are simply listening to driver's tales.

Thank you for confirming that you were indeed exaggerating.

 

[Qwerty133]

Deleted

 

[Busaholic]

Think you've missed a batch.... The F-XMS Mercedes minis were used to convert the 28/31 to Gold Arrow from RMs. Of course, some of that batch did end up in Cornwall.

Apologies, time goes so quickly by.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Apologies, time goes so quickly by.

We all have the odd senior moment and yep, time does move on. I remember travelling on one of those F-XMS machines on the 305 in Newquay in 2001 - where does the time go??

 

[neilmc]

That's all lovely - who's paying for that? Of course, I'm sure that they'll be a load of funding for that in today's budget
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, it seems to work just fine in London - the fares are cheap, you don't need to know which company is running the service and you're not stranded in some suburb when the last bus runs at seven p.m. Plus route maps at every stop and "next stop" information on the buses.

On the age of buses, I don't think this is much of an issue from a passenger viewpoint - as long as the bus isn't obviously decrepit, a bus twenty years old looks remarkable similar to one just out of the factory these days.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

That's all lovely - who's paying for that? Of course, I'm sure that they'll be a load of funding for that in today's budget
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well, it seems to work just fine in London - the fares are cheap, you don't need to know which company is running the service and you're not stranded in some suburb when the last bus runs at seven p.m. Plus route maps at every stop and "next stop" information on the buses.

On the age of buses, I don't think this is much of an issue from a passenger viewpoint - as long as the bus isn't obviously decrepit, a bus twenty years old looks remarkable similar to one just out of the factory these days.

Of course, London gets a shed load of cash that nowhere else gets viz:

"Public spending on transport in London is relatively high, both in terms of total spending, and on a per head basis (£774 per head in 2010/11). After London, the two regions with the highest spending on transport in 2010/11 were the North West (£337 per head) and the East (£328 per head) whilst the area with the lowest spend per head was the South West (£212 per head). The disparity is mainly in the form of London versus other regions, rather than a north/south divide"

That's from the Treasury PESA. If you want the same in the regions, you would need even more expenditure per head. However, is that going to happen? Er no...

 

[Mutant Lemming]

The design of buses has just evolved to keep pace with the changing population. How many 'modern-sized ' people can sit two abreast on the double seats of an RT? They are also designed with the general dumbing down/compensation culture elements - as in no rear platforms to fall off etc. and for the terminally lazy who believe it is their right to wheel a pram laden with cans of dog food in to the wheelchair space at the expense of spaces for other passengers. The buses we have now are fine for the people they serve.