Diamond Bus - Unusual Workings

[bususer12]

30207 on the 142, a very strange sight.

I reckon cadets are needed though for some journeys instead of being squashed into an MPD. How busy was 30207 and would you say the 142 is busier or quieter after the changes?

I think the cadet replaced one of the S Reg Red Diamond darts, as it was on this morning, but not the afternoon

[iamwilljh92]

20136 is operating on the locals in Kidderminster today can not remember which it was on

Yeah because we need another MPD in Kiddy...

Like a hole in the head

[trident4370]

20914 50
30207 56

[PM]

20914 50
30207 56

20914? What kind of bus is this as I can't find it on any fleetlist. And I doubt it is 20814 either....

[winston]

20914 50
30207 56

20914? What kind of bus is this as I can't find it on any fleetlist. And I doubt it is 20814 either....

Solo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68628359@N04/12106864544/

[PM]

20914 50
30207 56

20914? What kind of bus is this as I can't find it on any fleetlist. And I doubt it is 20814 either....

Solo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68628359@N04/12106864544/

Isn't this 20522? Must have been renumbered recently then.

[winston]

20914 50
30207 56

20914? What kind of bus is this as I can't find it on any fleetlist. And I doubt it is 20814 either....

Solo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68628359@N04/12106864544/

Isn't this 20522? Must have been renumbered recently then.

I wonder if that is where the confusion is, i.e. Solo 20522 MX57UPW as it is now known, is still showing original fleetnumber 20914?

[PM]

20914 50
30207 56

20914? What kind of bus is this as I can't find it on any fleetlist. And I doubt it is 20814 either....

Solo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68628359@N04/12106864544/

Isn't this 20522? Must have been renumbered recently then.

I wonder if that is where the confusion is, i.e. Solo 20522 MX57UPW as it is now known, is still showing original fleetnumber 20914?

Yeah: it seems more logical trying to get buses into certain series eg 205.. for solos/primos/MPDs/e200s/streetlites but logically the other two MX57 solos are 2091. so would surely make sense to have the same batch of vehicles numbered in the same series?

[Liverpool Street]

Can't go wrong with 3/4 digit fleet numbers. That's one thing I wish all operators would adopt. I find First & Stagecoaches' system disgusting, let alone Diamonds.

[winston]

Can't go wrong with 3/4 digit fleet numbers. That's one thing I wish all operators would adopt. I find First & Stagecoaches' system disgusting, let alone Diamonds.

I agree, plus you can no longer use the registration numbers to identify fleet numbers

[PM]

Can't go wrong with 3/4 digit fleet numbers. That's one thing I wish all operators would adopt. I find First & Stagecoaches' system disgusting, let alone Diamonds.

I agree, plus you can no longer use the registration numbers to identify fleet numbers

For diamond's fleet, a three digit system as used by Go Ahead would work fine. I guess 5 digit numbers can show more info eg single/double, dda or not etc.

[winston]

Can't go wrong with 3/4 digit fleet numbers. That's one thing I wish all operators would adopt. I find First & Stagecoaches' system disgusting, let alone Diamonds.

I agree, plus you can no longer use the registration numbers to identify fleet numbers

For diamond's fleet, a three digit system as used by Go Ahead would work fine. I guess 5 digit numbers can show more info eg single/double, dda or not etc.

Wouldn't it just be simpler to use a 3 digit system allocate the fleet numbers in blocks for vehicles with the same/similar specs, so allocators can easily identify which bus is the most appropriate to allocate where

[PM]

Can't go wrong with 3/4 digit fleet numbers. That's one thing I wish all operators would adopt. I find First & Stagecoaches' system disgusting, let alone Diamonds.

I agree, plus you can no longer use the registration numbers to identify fleet numbers

For diamond's fleet, a three digit system as used by Go Ahead would work fine. I guess 5 digit numbers can show more info eg single/double, dda or not etc.

Wouldn't it just be simpler to use a 3 digit system allocate the fleet numbers in blocks for vehicles with the same/similar specs, so allocators can easily identify which bus is the most appropriate to allocate where

I agree-coaches in the 100's, MPDs/solos/streetlites/primos etc in the 200's/300's, darts/cadets/versas/streetlites in the 400's, full length single deckers in the 500's , deckers in the 600's and driver trainers etc in the 700's.

[trident4370]

20914 50
30207 56

20914? What kind of bus is this as I can't find it on any fleetlist. And I doubt it is 20814 either....

Black Diamond Solo

[bwsau cymru]

allocations seem to be a bit different, there was a ex transdev b7 on 43 today and one on the 4, only saw 1 dart of the 4 rest Volvos and cadets, improvement I must say!!!