New Deliveries / New Livery & Branding Discussion

[lauren1993]

No I shouldn't

Is there any reason why they've done it this way? Seems very strange.

[Jack]

Why 6943/6944 are going to yardley wood, I'll never understand. So messy. Should've just sent 6915/6916 there instead.

That's like 1932 and 1935. They sent 1911, 1912 to WB instead of 1932 and 1935.

[lauren1993]

That's like 1932 and 1935. They sent 1911, 1912 to WB instead of 1932 and 1935.

Wouldn't annoy me as much if they didn't spend so much time making the fleet numbers uniform. Makes it completely pointless, and really upsets my OCD!! Even more silly to send random brand new buses to random garages out of sync when they spent so long arranging it neatly for the past few years!!

[Tony]

Is there any reason why they've done it this way? Seems very strange.

I have done it so Yardley Wood has two tachograph buses

[SK68MEV]

I have done it so Yardley Wood has two tachograph buses

what do you mean

[don]

what do you mean

When 6147 and 6148 transfer to AG, YW won't have tachograph buses for private hire - presumably 6943 and 6944 will have them fitted and will be the replacements. Apologies if I have this wrong.

[Tony]

When 6147 and 6148 transfer to AG, YW won't have tachograph buses for private hire - presumably 6943 and 6944 will have them fitted and will be the replacements. Apologies if I have this wrong.

Correct Don

[MW]

It must have come down to either having the fleet numbers in sequence or the number plates in sequence.

[Tony]

It must have come down to either having the fleet numbers in sequence or the number plates in sequence.

Nothing of the sort.

Purely I got asked to allocate the buses and that 6942-51 would be tachograph fitted and had to be split between all four garages, and have managed to do it with only YW not having a solid block

[Jack6101]

Will the BC ones get branded get branded for the x70

[SK68MEV]

Will the BC ones get branded get branded for the x70

persuming a couple will

[Gareth]

Wouldn't annoy me as much if they didn't spend so much time making the fleet numbers uniform. Makes it completely pointless, and really upsets my OCD!! Even more silly to send random brand new buses to random garages out of sync when they spent so long arranging it neatly for the past few years!!

You would have had a nervous breakdown when 2975-3124 were delivered! Many garages receiving two here, three there. Was very 'random' especially some of the 30** series!

[don]

You would have had a nervous breakdown when 2975-3124 were delivered! Many garages receiving two here, three there. Was very 'random' especially some of the 30** series!

Indeed - and also the 2736-2860 batch - in fact it was so reminiscent of how Midland Red often allocated their new buses it seemed possible it was an ex Midland Red employee doing it - as if to reinforce that view the ex MR garages in the Black Country seemed particularly to have them in very small numbers - all very odd and completely different from previous practice.

[Mike K]

You would have had a nervous breakdown when 2975-3124 were delivered! Many garages receiving two here, three there. Was very 'random' especially some of the 30** series!

I recall those days - trying to work out which bus was based at which garage was a nightmare. The much smaller batches started with 2611-2735 when a garage receiving 14 vehicles might get them in 3 lots (for example Harborne got 2653-57, 2703-07 and 2721-24). Then as Gareth says, by the time 2975-3124 arrived the allocations were like a lucky dip. I recall Quinton had one of this batch (3057). The plan was it would have 2 more later in the batch but these subsequently got allocated to WN instead, and 3057 soon followed.

The allocations these days are a lot 'tidier' from an enthusiast's perspective.

EDIT - after doing a bit of reading, appears Quinton had 3116 from this batch for a brief spell too - I never knew that.

[The Real 4778]

I think some idiosyncrasies make it much more interesting, it just seems so sterile otherwise!