First bus has never seen the 2 or the old 62 as a double deck route it has always been a single deck at a higher frequency than most routes
I find this an interesting topic and comparison point. Is it known why First prefer to run routes more frequently with smaller vehicles when larger vehicles are able to be used? A bit of the 2 in the east and a bit immediately west of the city centre operates where the 2 is the only route but the rest is shared with the 60/A, 61 and 240 in the east and with the 1, 3, 6 and 77 in the west so even if the 2 was less frequent, most areas would still have a frequent service.
I guess the smaller vehicles/more frequent also applies to the 1 and 240? Or do they both have low bridge sections which absolutely cannot be avoided?
I'm just mentally comparing this to Edinburgh where every route which can possibly be operated with double deckers is so, excepting a few routes which are all secondary services.
(I then got distracted and wrote them all out - off the top of my head, 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 24, 27, 29, 31, 33, 34, 35, 37, 43, 44, 45, 47, 49, 70, 71, 106, 113, 124, 140, 141, X18, X19, X27, X28, are all operated by deckers when single decks could be used. I would say it probably wouldn't be practically possible to operate the 11, 16, 25, 26 and 100 with single decks due to the high passenger numbers. 30, 38, 46, 48 and X7 physically have to use single decks due to unavoidable low bridges. 2, 12, 36 and X5 use single decks where doubles could physically fit).