Flaming Bendies!

[Bighat]

This morning at 08.20, yet ANOTHER Mercedes-Benz Citaro 'Bendie Bus' went up in flames.

The East London Bus Group vehicle, 23038 (LX04 KZX), caught fire as it was exiting the Redbridge roundabout as it left the A12 to join the A406 towards Ilford.

The bus was empty and out of service at the time, as it was travelling from its depot at Waterden Rd, Stratford (WA) to Ilford, where it was due to enter service.

The safety record of these vehicles seems to leave much to be desired.

How many more fires will it take until TfL remove these mobile fire hazards from the streets of London?

 

[class 313]

This morning at 08.20, yet ANOTHER Mercedes-Benz Citaro 'Bendie Bus' went up in flames.

The East London Bus Group vehicle, 23038 (LX04 KZX), caught fire as exiting the Redbridge roundabout as it left the A12 to join the A406 towards Ilford.

The bus was empty and out of service at the time, as it was travelling from its depot at Waterden Rd, Stratford (WA) to Ilford, where it was due to enter service.

The safety record of these vehicles seems to leave much to be desired.

How many more fires will it take until TfL remove these mobile fire hazards from the streets of London?

Saying that, the Citaro buses we have on the GreenLine (Heathrow - Harlow via Watford/St Albans/Hatfield/Hertford) Seem to be doing great. As well as the new ones UNO bought for the 601 to Watford from Hatfield.

 

[Gavelex]

You beat me to it

 

[Bighat]

Saying that, the Citaro buses we have on the GreenLine (Heathrow - Harlow via Watford/St Albans/Hatfield/Hertford) Seem to be doing great. As well as the new ones UNO bought for the 601 to Watford from Hatfield.

Yes, First London operate a number of RIGID Citaros on the RV1 LBL service, also without incident. It would appear that it is ONLY the articulated vehicles that seem to be prone to catching fire.

 

[Max]

God that could have been nasty if it had been in service!

 

[thomasgholmes]

Lets hope they come out of service soon.
A big hazzard.

 

[tramboy]

Quite possibly, they aren't. If you look at the examples in service on the mainland (ie "Europe"), their safety record is also impeccable. However, think about those vehicles that catch on fire each day...arriva seem to lose some types of vehicle in Yorkshire due to engine fires, and others aren't so widely reported.

It seems to me that because the artics replaced things that were "loved", or part of our heritage, people won't accept them because they are new, and one of those continental ideas. In fact, for the routes they run on (high density crush loading) it makes more sense to have an artic than to have a decker...less people going upstairs, shorter dwell times at stops. Look at the Citaro artics in service on the mainland, and you'll see what I mean; accepted by the passengers, and only the occasional fire as expected with any vehicle.

You can look at this a different way...say it was a common as muck in service train that went up...like a 170. Would you be calling for their removal then? Think of what the 170 replaced...(everybody now, come on, think). Looking at it from an economical, rather than enthusiasts views, do you really want that back?

Regards

Dave

 

[Bighat]

Quite possibly, they aren't. If you look at the examples in service on the mainland (ie "Europe"), their safety record is also impeccable. However, think about those vehicles that catch on fire each day...arriva seem to lose some types of vehicle in Yorkshire due to engine fires, and others aren't so widely reported.

It seems to me that because the artics replaced things that were "loved", or part of our heritage, people won't accept them because they are new, and one of those continental ideas. In fact, for the routes they run on (high density crush loading) it makes more sense to have an artic than to have a decker...less people going upstairs, shorter dwell times at stops. Look at the Citaro artics in service on the mainland, and you'll see what I mean; accepted by the passengers, and only the occasional fire as expected with any vehicle.

You can look at this a different way...say it was a common as muck in service train that went up...like a 170. Would you be calling for their removal then? Think of what the 170 replaced...(everybody now, come on, think). Looking at it from an economical, rather than enthusiasts views, do you really want that back?

Regards

Dave

Sorry, but I think you have missed the point. No, most people who are against articulated vehicles IN LONDON are NOT secret Routemaster romantics. Much of Central London has a ban on Articulated trucks (or any commercial vehicle over 7.5 tonnes for that matter) for most of the day, except for access.

Unlike many continental cities, and I have been to many of them, operating conditions are far less cramped than in the centre (zone 1 and part of zone2 for identification). Arguements have been made, and the case is a good one, for the use of tri-axle rigid vehicles.

It is the 'footprint' of road that a vehicle occupies that determines how much congestion a single vehicle can cause, let alone several.

There are numerous circumstances that I can think of wher high density articulated vehicles make good sense, but Central London is NOT one of them.

As for the technicalities, the latest 'incident' happened to a vehicle straight out of the depot on a cold Saturday morning, had only travelled about three miles on a three lane dual carriageway road, before it caught fire.

However, what prior damage had been done by many previous days of start-stop running on this very busy, and heavily congested route, is a point worth examining.