New Dublin Bus 2013 GT (proposed or permanent) Allocations

dublinman1990

With Delivery of the GT's imminent; this is interpreted from my own typing from Dublinbuses.com.

http://www.dublinbuses.com/

Garage allocations for New Dublin Bus 2013 GTs

GT 81-100 - Donnybrook 20
GT 101-113 - Ringsend 13
GT 114-119 - Clontarf 6
GT 120-127 - Conyngham Road 8
GT 128-142 - Harristown 15
GT 143-160 - Phibsboro 18

All new & current GT's & VG's to be fitted with tree fenders (like the double deckers in the UK) with other types of the fleet being possibly retro-fitted with them.

It also says that delivery of the new GT's will take place in Mid-July 2013; starting with the conversion of Route 11. Other proposed routes to be taken up by GT's are Routes 9, 32, 49, 54A, 56A, 68, 69, 114 and 140.

I've also heard that rumours that routes 31 & 111 are to be converted into GT operation as well. Any information on those routes & others will be great.

dfx-

The 56A strikes me as a very logical place to put them or the EVs in Ringsend.

Personally, I'd prefer if the GTs were moved onto the 65s and the EVs that live there were moved to the 56A.

dublinman1990

It would appear logical for them to be on the 114 route as well where I live near Blackrock & Stillorgan.

This is because of trees hitting mostly AV's that regularly serve the route outside the Avoca Off Licence & outside St Augustine's School in Carysfort Avenue. If you were going beyond that route towards Ticknock; I'd say it is not too bad.

The other route I have concern is of the 111. The way it's timetable is laid out now would suggest it is mainly used as a spare cover for straggling passengers who miss both the 7 & the 45A. A double decker (mainly an AV) on the 111 is practically a waste of resources for DB. A WV can easily suit that route no problem.

A new 111 timetable with a possible extension of the route has to be highlighted for GT's to appear on the route.

fta93

Lots of 31s and 32s are already GT operated at Clontarf from the surplus from 29A and 104, so they would make sense.

dfx-

I'm surprised the likes of the 42 and 43 don't get officially named as GT routes. The 43 has reliably one GT operating in the evening

fta93

Some turn up on the 42s at weekends. Could take some off the sparsely populated 104 but thats another story..

john boye

dublinman1990 wrote: »

It would appear logical for them to be on the 114 route as well where I live near Blackrock & Stillorgan.

This is because of trees hitting mostly AV's that regularly serve the route outside the Avoca Off Licence & outside St Augustine's School in Carysfort Avenue. If you were going beyond that route towards Ticknock; I'd say it is not too bad.

I use the 114 occasionally and I can't think of a less logical route to put brand new double-deckers on. It's empty most of the time!

NiallJS99

Here is a picture of GT81 (not mine): http://www.flickr.com/photos/darren_hall/9210211860/

dublinman1990

NiallJS99 wrote: »

Here is a picture of GT81 (not mine): http://www.flickr.com/photos/darren_hall/9210211860/[/QUOTE]

It's looks exactly the same as the last batch of GT's. The seats in it are the same as before.

It is an B9TL though; which is still a good sign. But I think that it is better to have the new style though. It gives a nicer feel to it.

NiallJS99

dublinman1990 wrote: »

NiallJS99 wrote: »

Here is a picture of GT81 (not mine): http://www.flickr.com/photos/darren_hall/9210211860/[/QUOTE]

It's looks exactly the same as the last batch of GT's. The seats in it are the same as before.

It is an B9TL though; which is still a good sign. But I think that it is better to have the new style though. It gives a nicer feel to it.

It's not exactly the same, it has the tree defender.

dublinman1990

NiallJS99 wrote: »

dublinman1990 wrote: »

It's not exactly the same, it has the tree defender.

I do notice that as well. From it's side it does look quite small.

joegriffinjnr

Looks outdated before it even enters service. Why o why haven't they ordered the newer wrights front? The seats look horrid, the Bus Eireann ones are a hundred times better. Bring back the RV,s and the RA,s!

Trebor176

GT81 was at Dublin Bus HQ today. It's registered 132-D-1714.

miller50841

AX 464 in Donnybrook has been fitted with the stainless steel bar its down to the outer skin always having to be repaired from all roads where hedges and trees are no longer been cut back.

It will save them having to send out the tree cutter bus and save money on man hours.

joegriffinjnr

Tree cutter bus was in Newtownmountkennedy today, so it still gets out and about.

LXFlyer

The tree cutter gets out and about every summer - it was out the week before last in Dundrum.

lucernarian

I wonder why the 56A would get the new allocations. It's not a cross-city route and it's quite infrequent with very low Pax numbers. Perhaps to encourage people back onto the bus from other modes of transport? I would imagine Ballymount Industrial Estate and Kingswood are rather low-profile places for a new bus.

LXFlyer

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

I wonder why the 56A would get the new allocations. It's not a cross-city route and it's quite infrequent with very low Pax numbers. Perhaps to encourage people back onto the bus from other modes of transport? I would imagine Ballymount Industrial Estate and Kingswood are rather low-profile places for a new bus.

You really are over-analysing this! :-)

It boils down purely to the Peak Vehicle Requirement (PVR) that each route has - how many buses are needed to operate each route.

DB would look at how many buses they're getting, and spread them across the depots - from there on it depends on the PVR.

Nothing to do with high/low profile.

lucernarian

lxflyer wrote: »

You really are over-analysing this! :-)

It boils down purely to the Peak Vehicle Requirement (PVR) that each route has - how many buses are needed to operate each route.

DB would look at how many buses they're getting, and spread them across the depots - from there on it depends on the PVR.

Nothing to do with high/low profile.

I have been talking to people in the company about this, they were wondering the same thing. I just think the 56A seems to be an odd choice compared to the 77A or even perhaps the 15A or 15B, especially when other posters had welcomed such a move. But the 65s would be a good move in my mind either.

LXFlyer

Look at the PVR of those routes - the 56a is an easy one to convert as it requires a maximum of 2 buses!

Ringsend is getting 13 buses - the main tranche of which will convert the 49 to GT operation - the remainder are going onto the 56a.

It is purely down to PVR - there are 2 for the 56a and 2 for the 114. They would be the left overs from converting all the other routes. The 15a/b, 65 and 77a would all require far more buses.

lucernarian

lxflyer wrote: »

Look at the PVR of those routes - the 56a is an easy one to convert as it requires a maximum of 2 buses!

Ringsend is getting 13 buses - the main tranche of which will convert the 49 to GT operation - the remainder are going onto the 56a.

It is purely down to PVR - there are 2 for the 56a and 2 for the 114. They would be the left overs from converting all the other routes. The 15a/b, 65 and 77a would all require far more buses.

The 65/B only needs what, 6 buses in total for the day? Though I hadn't reckoned the 49s would have used so many.

LXFlyer

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

The 65/B only needs what, 6 buses in total for the day? Though I hadn't reckoned the 49s would have used so many.

The 65/b requires a PVR of at least 7. I'd ask why would that route change given it already is operated by relatively recently delivered buses?

There may be a couple of spares added into the delivery that will be seen on other Ringsend routes - the routes listed are only the ones that are being fully converted.

The whole point is that it boils down to the PVR of each route and the number of buses being delivered.

It has nothing to do with low or high profile of the buses on certain routes.

dfx-

The low seating capacity of these would be something that I'd keep away from even something like the 65. GT24 was the last westbound 13 tonight and it couldn't handle the loads efficiently on a busy service. 10 uncomfortable minutes slower than the regular (and just as busy) service done by an AV, EV or AX.

On the allocation argument, I'll be extremely surprised if they are rigidly allocated to the 56A, regardless of PVR. There will still be a splash of AXs in particular. This is the route that had lots of RVs as a low floor route, allocation made no difference

As a frequent user of the route, I hope this is the case.

lxflyer wrote: »

Ringsend is getting 13 buses - the main tranche of which will convert the 49 to GT operation - the remainder are going onto the 56a.

It is purely down to PVR - there are 2 for the 56a and 2 for the 114. They would be the left overs from converting all the other routes. The 15a/b, 65 and 77a would all require far more buses.

The 49 already has at least three from the current batch, so there will be plenty left over after replacing the usual other allocation of AX480-AX482. The 49 only needs two or three at night time with a 40 minute frequency or 60 minutes at weekends.

Out of 13, maybe half would be taken up by the 49 and 56A. Leaving half to float around..

lucernarian

dfx- wrote:

The low seating capacity of these would be something that I'd keep away from even something like the 65. GT24 was the last westbound 13 tonight and it couldn't handle the loads efficiently on a busy service. 10 uncomfortable minutes slower than the regular (and just as busy) service done by an AV, EV or AX.

I agree with your post in the main though I'm suprised at the 13 comment. For services like those going across town, having more standing space and especially 2 door operation would help substantially with boarding times in the city centre. The seating's also more comfortable than those vehicles but yes indeed there are fewer seats.

dfx-

And on very busy services like the last 13, you notice the effect of this lack of seats. You notice it much more than the gimmicks like wifi, the camera display or stop display.

The service also keeps a lot of its load all the way to Clondalkin, so standing space is not much use. It was probably 4/5ths full on departure from Christchurch - a typical load, but on an AV/AX/EV, that'd be spread out on more seats, aiding quicker disembarkation and more comfort. In terms of comfort, I'd only rate it ahead of the EV downstairs where there is no cushion at all.

lucernarian

dfx- wrote: »

And on very busy services like the last 13, you notice the effect of this lack of seats. You notice it much more than the gimmicks like wifi, the camera display or stop display.

The service also keeps a lot of its load all the way to Clondalkin, so standing space is not much use. It was probably 4/5ths full on departure from Christchurch - a typical load, but on an AV/AX/EV, that'd be spread out on more seats, aiding quicker disembarkation and more comfort. In terms of comfort, I'd only rate it ahead of the EV downstairs where there is no cushion at all.

Still don't get this quicker disembarkation thing. 2 doors is always better than 1 door. My hundreds of journeys on 46As which crop up a GT now and then have shown me that. There isn't really a problem unless people are standing for a while after leaving the city centre area? It's a lot better sitting beside people with the more individualised seats of VTs and GTs.

dublinman1990

A quick question here guys!

How often do the current & new GT's have an engine failure & brake down?

I am asking this question because I was passing through Merrion Road in my Aunt's car last night.

I had seen GT14; on the 7 bus to Loughlinstown; which broke down opposite the British Embassy because both of it's indicators were flashing at the time. There was a lot of passengers waiting for a new bus to arrive; including the driver.

Surprisingly; as my aunt was driving me home; I had seen GT15 parking at a bus stop opposite St Michael's College which said 'Entering Service' written on it. There was a recovery engineer was standing beside the bus with a lot of fuel wiring with him.

GT15 may have been the bus that was meant to be replaced for the 7 bus to Loughlinstown which broke down at the embassy.

And thought to myself; if that was true. Well Oh dear Oh dear. How very embarrassing for DB.

AlekSmart

dublinman1990 wrote: »

And thought to myself; if that was true. Well Oh dear Oh dear. How very embarrassing for DB.

Embarrassing..?...Not in the slightest.

ALL,and I emphasise ALL new or "Improved" vehicle types come with a certain shakedown period built-in.

The current Volvo B9 TL's which the GT represents in the Dublin Bus fleet do have some issues,which are being replicated across the UK also.

Probably the most visible of these issues is an engine cooling problem which Volvo are working to rectify....this is the only major issue which may cause a failure on the road.

If any embarrassment is felt it should be Volvo that is admitting to it,however the Nordics don't really understand Embarrassment as a concept.

dfx-

dfx- wrote: »

On the allocation argument, I'll be extremely surprised if they are rigidly allocated to the 56A, regardless of PVR. There will still be a splash of AXs in particular. This is the route that had lots of RVs as a low floor route, allocation made no difference

As a frequent user of the route, I hope this is the case.

To reinforce this point, AX478 was taken out on the 56A this evening. Except the driver couldn't get the displays to work. Called into the garage, told them the fleet number where they explained that five buses, AX478-AX482 cannot display anything but the 49.

Had to continue in service but with "Not in Service" on the front and *** at side and back.

GTs will be 'loosely' allocated to the 56A..

AlekSmart

dfx- wrote: »

To reinforce this point, AX478 was taken out on the 56A this evening. Except the driver couldn't get the displays to work. Called into the garage, told them the fleet number where they explained that five buses, AX478-AX482 cannot display anything but the 49.

Had to continue in service but with "Not in Service" on the front and *** at side and back.

GTs will be 'loosely' allocated to the 56A..

There's no great mystery about this either,as the company is currently involved in a significant Fuel Consumption monitoring exercise involving selected vehicle types.

In order to allow for direct comparisons they are being kept on directly comparable work,ie the same route/duty cycles.

dublinman1990

Two new groups of photos showing the GT's

GT81, 82 & 83 are pictured here in Broadstone

http://www.dublinbuses.com/gt/gt81-82-83.html

GT81 is showing modifications while being pictured in Broadstone

http://www.dublinbuses.com/gt/gt81/gt81.html