If you’ve read it on Facebook it must be true…No one can use them in that livery as I've been told on Facebook.
If you’ve read it on Facebook it must be true…No one can use them in that livery as I've been told on Facebook.
Here is the proof.What you've been told on Facebook is clearly rubbish. Operators can and do use buses in previous operators' liveries. There's no problem as long as any branding is removed beforehand.
By the way, if you are referring to Facebook or any other sources, forum rules require that you provide a link to and a relevant quote from that source.
You can trademark a colour so 'competitors' cannot use it, but I agree it would be ridiculous for TfGM to have done that.No one can copyright a bland allover yellow livery. All they could insist on is the removal of any logos etc. Don’t believe everything you read on FaceTube…..
Trademarking a color simply allows a company to use a particular combination and shade of color in its own industry.
Obviously. I read on facebook last week that the London Eye is being relocated to Scotland. It was on facebook, therefore it must be true.If you’ve read it on Facebook it must be true…
Hmmm.... is this really so important?
As well as a stipulation in the contract to run vehicles in the specific Bee Network yellow, there is also a stipulation to repaint them out of it on disposal/exiting Bee Network operations? Or it may be that First, being keen to create the right impression by repainting even short term members of the fleet into yellow, are equally keen not to run vehicles in yellow elsewhere and incur TfGM displeasure.
Whatever the reasoning, it seems rather ironic that First maintaining such standards when (in an alleged hiatus on painting prior to a new corporate scheme), there are frankly loads of vehicles running around in an array of incorrect colour schemes. First West of England has vehicles in the Aberdeen Urban 2 (albeit subtly amended for the 8), York Uni pink, Swansea or Southampton red, Bristol P&R green, as well as a number in various blue schemes though being in Bath, they actually fit in quite well. I'll add that I saw a couple of the ex Sheffield e400s in service on Fri/Sat still in urban 1. They looked fairly rough too!
Still, nothing compared to First Kernow...
It is true, and it will become the Glasgow Aye!Obviously. I read on facebook last week that the London Eye is being relocated to Scotland. It was on facebook, therefore it must be true.
What will happen to the B9s that are used on there then and also will the 77 cope with single deckers?The 5 and 77 are actually booked single deck according to the running boards, so that’s 7 for LH.
I think personally that as long as the lettering and branding is removed from the bee network liveried buses, they should be ok to use, maybe it’s a case of interpretation of the rules?
John
I would say the same for the 5 as well. It just got upgraded to double deckers and now it's going back to Streetlites again, how's it that helping the overcrowding problems on the 8Seems an odd decision for the 77 which is supposed to be a strategic boost in capacity for two main corridors to be operated with single deck vehicles.
It still adds extra capacity along that section of route as it's an extra 2 buses an hour but when I see the 5 it usually isn't that busy. I saw it a couple times in the first week of operation but I'm not sure now. The 77 isn't that busy cause a single decker has been on the 77 a load of times since it started. That single decker being the only single decker in public service at Lawrence hill depot 47544 SN14 FFU.I would say the same for the 5 as well. It just got upgraded to double deckers and now it's going back to Streetlites again, how's it that helping the overcrowding problems on the 8
What bus number was it? Also where was this to and what time?Strange event this evening. Can a driver or someone who understands scheduling more than me explain what might have happened?
A bus turned up at the stop (third stop on the journey) and we got on. As the last person was boarding, another bus pulled up behind it on the same route, same destination, and the driver of that one came to ours and said "you very late?". There was then a short discussion between them, followed by our driver saying to us all "You're on the wrong bus, I made a mistake. Can you get on the one behind".
We swapped buses and went off with the second driver, while the first one in his bus changed his disply to not in service.
I'm confused as to what actually happened!?!
There's no point in posting such a request to the forum if you're unable/unwilling to supply specific information. Unless we know the details of your journey, your enquiry is vague and unlikely to receive a meaningful answer.I'd rather not say as I don't want to inadvertently land a driver in it, I hope my question can be answered without that info...
I will say though that on bustimes the "errant" vehicle tracked correctly on its previous journey, and showed on the map as being at this stop on this route at this time, but the journey was tracking only on the second vehicle on bustimes.
Really? I'm trying to protect the driver by not giving information that would pinpoint them. Surely a generic question of what could have happened can be answered by those who understand Ticketer or scheduling without knowing the specifics?
OK, I'll give the information, but if the dirver gets called in as a result, please don't blame me.
It was the T1 at 2010 from the Centre to Thornbury.
The first vehicle was 39463, the second vehicle was 33973.
Indeed, there could have been miscommunication from control tooI'm not sure there's anything to protect the driver from in this case.
39463 worked the 18:55 into the centre. Normally this goes to the depot (based on the previous several days worth of tracking). Looks like either the driver had an old diagram, or just misread what they were doing.