Alexander Dennis Enviro400 Discussion

[Stevo]

Sorry - I meant 2001-2177 should have been 1001-1177.

[arrifirststage]

'Quite a young member', I like that! 😃 I'm 35. So as a child growing up in the 80s it's the 6301 onwards batch that I know of the most. I have vague memories of the 45** batch that lasted until 1987, but late BCT, early WMPTE and ex Midland Red are a bit too early for me.

No offence meant........believe me 35 to me is very young,I have Grandchildren that age.
Seriously,we all remember our favourite era as being when we were in our teens.......my favourites are Bimingham City Transport early post-war buses,immaculate and reaching a standard we will never see again.
Just wait a while,these new MMC's will be officially vandalised with pointless branding before you know it.

[paulb1973]

WMPTE introduced some logic into its fleet numbering in 1984 or so - minibuses from 501 up and single deckers from 1001 up. Metrobuses were already numbered from 2001 up and WMT started low-floor double deckers from 4001 up, artics from 6001 up. So the B7RLEs 2001-2177 should clearly have been numbered 1001 - 1077. This would have let the E400 MMCs be numbered 2001 up in the older double-deck series and not in the artic series.

Yes, I thought that might be the case; returning to the lowest possible 1xxx number (restarting the single-deck numbering series, as it were). NX have had a propensity to start the numbering of new batches of vehicles in separate number ranges - or at a more notable number. 1750 for the first Volvo B7RLE/Wright Eclipse Urban's and 2001 for the Urban 2's, missing out 1708-42/44-49 and 1954-2000 respectively. In fact, I would have just renumbered that additional Mercedes O405N 1743 to 1708 (the matching reg and fleet number hardly matters these days) and started the new Volvo's at 1709. While 2001 etc would have commenced 1954 and carried-on into the 2xxx series. '1908' doesn't exist currently - but that number has at-least been used (several times!). These gaps look a bit untidy!

[Tony]

WMPTE introduced some logic into its fleet numbering in 1984 or so - minibuses from 501 up and single deckers from 1001 up. Metrobuses were already numbered from 2001 up and WMT started low-floor double deckers from 4001 up, artics from 6001 up. So the B7RLEs 2001-2177 should clearly have been numbered 1001 - 1077. This would have let the E400 MMCs be numbered 2001 up in the older double-deck series and not in the artic series.

Yes, I thought that might be the case; returning to the lowest possible 1xxx number (restarting the single-deck numbering series, as it were). NX have had a propensity to start the numbering of new batches of vehicles in separate number ranges - or at a more notable number. 1750 for the first Volvo B7RLE/Wright Eclipse Urban's and 2001 for the Urban 2's, missing out 1708-42/44-49 and 1954-2000 respectively. In fact, I would have just renumbered that additional Mercedes O405N 1743 to 1708 (the matching reg and fleet number hardly matters these days) and started the new Volvo's at 1709. While 2001 etc would have commenced 1954 and carried-on into the 2xxx series. '1908' doesn't exist currently - but that number has at-least been used (several times!). These gaps look a bit untidy!

To the people who have to use the fleet numbering system, as opposed to those who look at it the current system works. The people that allocate buses to service have a much easier life the way it is.

If you are told where possible allocate Scanias to the 4 route life is much easier if you just have to think 18xx. gaps in fleet numbering don't make the slightest difference to anyone within the company

[paulb1973]

WMPTE introduced some logic into its fleet numbering in 1984 or so - minibuses from 501 up and single deckers from 1001 up. Metrobuses were already numbered from 2001 up and WMT started low-floor double deckers from 4001 up, artics from 6001 up. So the B7RLEs 2001-2177 should clearly have been numbered 1001 - 1077. This would have let the E400 MMCs be numbered 2001 up in the older double-deck series and not in the artic series.

Yes, I thought that might be the case; returning to the lowest possible 1xxx number (restarting the single-deck numbering series, as it were). NX have had a propensity to start the numbering of new batches of vehicles in separate number ranges - or at a more notable number. 1750 for the first Volvo B7RLE/Wright Eclipse Urban's and 2001 for the Urban 2's, missing out 1708-42/44-49 and 1954-2000 respectively. In fact, I would have just renumbered that additional Mercedes O405N 1743 to 1708 (the matching reg and fleet number hardly matters these days) and started the new Volvo's at 1709. While 2001 etc would have commenced 1954 and carried-on into the 2xxx series. '1908' doesn't exist currently - but that number has at-least been used (several times!). These gaps look a bit untidy!

To the people who have to use the fleet numbering system, as opposed to those who look at it the current system works. The people that allocate buses to service have a much easier life the way it is.

If you are told where possible allocate Scanias to the 4 route life is much easier if you just have to think 18xx. gaps in fleet numbering don't make the slightest difference to anyone within the company

I know it doesn't matter what fleet number buses receive, at the end of the day. I prefer the 3 & 4-digit number system used by NX and for new double-deckers, there are huge unused numbers available for future deliveries; 6101-6999 presumably (which will take years to be used-up).

[Kevin]

Curious myself as to why they didn't start at 5000 for the MMCs. Cause there's 400 fleetnumbers right there before we hit the hybrids, and surely that would easily cover the remainder of the contract with ADL, once that's up new buses from other manufacturers could start with the 61xx series

[JoNi]

It's a new generation start at 1!

[The Fox 4846]

Any delivery dates for the MMC's?

[andrew1991]

Any delivery dates for the MMC's?

Throughout march and april for the 9

[Stevo]

WMPTE introduced some logic into its fleet numbering in 1984 or so - minibuses from 501 up and single deckers from 1001 up. Metrobuses were already numbered from 2001 up and WMT started low-floor double deckers from 4001 up, artics from 6001 up. So the B7RLEs 2001-2177 should clearly have been numbered 1001 - 1077. This would have let the E400 MMCs be numbered 2001 up in the older double-deck series and not in the artic series.

Yes, I thought that might be the case; returning to the lowest possible 1xxx number (restarting the single-deck numbering series, as it were). NX have had a propensity to start the numbering of new batches of vehicles in separate number ranges - or at a more notable number. 1750 for the first Volvo B7RLE/Wright Eclipse Urban's and 2001 for the Urban 2's, missing out 1708-42/44-49 and 1954-2000 respectively. In fact, I would have just renumbered that additional Mercedes O405N 1743 to 1708 (the matching reg and fleet number hardly matters these days) and started the new Volvo's at 1709. While 2001 etc would have commenced 1954 and carried-on into the 2xxx series. '1908' doesn't exist currently - but that number has at-least been used (several times!). These gaps look a bit untidy!

To the people who have to use the fleet numbering system, as opposed to those who look at it the current system works. The people that allocate buses to service have a much easier life the way it is.

If you are told where possible allocate Scanias to the 4 route life is much easier if you just have to think 18xx. gaps in fleet numbering don't make the slightest difference to anyone within the company

Perhaps then a better fleet numbering system would be one that told you automatically the type of bus, not that relied on your knowledge of the fleet. So perhaps we should have codes like many London operators. We could have SS for Scania single deck, DS for OmniCity deckers, VP for Presidents, and so on. It would be great fun!

[don]

I would imagine, on the basis Tony has described, the platinum and two tone E400s will be in different number series to make it easier for allocators. So maybe 5001 onwards will yet be used!!

Back to the 6101 - 6301 history, 6101-6140, 6156-6225 and 6261-6293 were Midland Red Fleetlines - does anyone remember what 6294-6298 were in the Midland Red fleet - a songle decker to rival an E200 in naffness IIRC - and the first of over 100 cheap and cheerful Fords - with Plaxton bodies!!

[monkeyjoe]

Will it be Walsall and BC after the 9 then, sorry if this has already been posted?

[Tony]

Will it be Walsall and BC after the 9 then, sorry if this has already been posted?

Only vehicles officially announced so far are
6101-22 (E400MMC standard for Pensnett - 9) deliveries staring end of February
861-875 (E200 same as up to 860 in all respects) split between Coventry (2/3); Pensnett (243/4) & Wolverhampton - delivery starting in March

[John]

I've had that problem with the door open button. People start to look at you, then you have to move them all back so I could get out of the cab and press the emergency door button to open the doors.

I also agree about the indicators, they start to flash well after the first beeping nose is heard

I went on a 49** on the 907 the other day, and the gearboxes have been programmed to get through the gears really quick to save diesel, make it even slower pulling away as the gear changes are too soon and you can not build up enough speed. I've heard that the 33 Enviro400s are also getting the same modifications

On the plus side, I do think that they are the best buses to drive though

I've noticed on new buses now the dashboard indicator light is unsynchronized with the actual rate if flash from the outside. And the beeps don't link up either. Of course the E200's don't beep at all and the B7rle flash quite annoyingly fast.

Amazing regarding the gearbox. What the drivers class as a fault, was in fact self inflicted by the company. I'm sure they'll be an accident due to the slow pull off. I remember 805 when new got rear ended because a car driver 'thought the bus would of pulled away quicker' haha

I have driven one of the modified Enviro400s this afternoon, 4939. All I can say is they're awful. When pulling away, the gear changes up at not even 1500RPM, and kickdown is virtually non-existant. You can feel then engine struggling to build up revs because it is in too high a gear for the road speed when accelerating, and it seems to be affecting the retarder somehow, because I found it difficult to brake smoothly when pulling up at bus stops

Good news is that so many drivers have complained about it, they are slowly been changed back!

[Liberator9]

Sounds awful @John - bet you're all glad they're going to change them back.  ;) Must be a safety issue really when trying to pull away from Traffic islands etc when the acceleration is so poor.