Scania/Custom Deliveries

[Merc1107]

I think gunzels are a bit out of touch with reality, the public sees their bus showing 106 or 228F or whatever and they catch it assuming it’s going to their destination.

Passengers will flag down any old bus going along the road with scarcely any regard for where it is going or whether it is even operating a public service!

It's been my experience that passengers notice the veteran buses when their route gets a lot of them; I have been on services in Perth that copped a lot of the last high floors and overheard remarks from passengers who were frustrated they always seem to end up on the 'old rattly buses'. Without such a sharp distinction between old and new in the fleet anymore, those remarks are nonexistent now; although passengers are accustomed to having USB charging points in enough buses that they do tend to notice when on a slightly older vehicle.

Certainly passengers do notice when their bus is untidy (amazing the difference clean wheels, for instance), and in a poor state of repair - little things like working lights, and a tidy bus make all the difference for a passenger's perception of the service, no matter how old the bus.

[Lt. Commander Data]

I think gunzels are a bit out of touch with reality, the public sees their bus showing 106 or 228F or whatever and they catch it assuming it’s going to their destination. They don’t worry whether it’s redfront or yellow front, whether it’s Custom or BusTech, Scania, Volvo, MAN or Merc. It’s a bus that gets them home. I drove an NL diesel on Friday and had positive comments about how good the air conditioning was, I’ve driven an 18.280 when passenger said how good it was to catch one of the new buses. And believe me people in wheelchairs or gophers love the NLs (diesel or CNG) with the wide rear door opening straight into the wheelchair area instead of squeezing and bashing through the very narrow winding front entry on a Scania to get to the wheelchair area. To the general public a bus is a bus.

Yes, a bus is a bus. But people prefer if that bus has amenities, for example USB charging. Now the fleet is all low floor and air conditioned, the differences are minimal.

At the very least, the government can plug the “average age” of the fleet being lower than it was previously if buses are retired early.

Positive public perception of transport is important to increase ridership. That’s why all the recent surveys on the admet website have included questions that relate to comfort and the image

[Lieselta]

I was riding an NL202 diesel recently, and one passenger remarked that the bus was old, and would probably break down at some point. Hell, one day about 6 years ago I was at TTP waiting for a 560, and some old woman complained that a "bloody old bus" (NL202) had shown up. Are those random people also out of touch with reality?

Well as established it looks like a "bloody old bus", even we can admit that. I don't think it's unreasonable for it to create a poor taste in people's mind.

[TA3001]

Positive public perception of transport is important to increase ridership. That’s why all the recent surveys on the admet website have included questions that relate to comfort and the image

If the bus ride quality matches that of a car along a corrugated road, then I don't see how it will be appealing. The jackpot CB80s aren't great by any means. But there is a noticeable difference with comfort levels compared to a bus from the Edinburgh factory.

Apparently the seat faults may have finally been brought to their attention.

[tonyp]

I've searched high and low and I can't find any reference anywhere to SA buying artics, from Custom or anybody. Custom doesn't mention an order on its website and they don't even have an artic version of the Endeavour in their catalogue. My main concern if SA were ordering new artics that they are proper low floor buses and not high floor combos.

[Mr OC Benz]

This media release includes the reference to a minimum of 29 rigids (built locally by Precision Buses) and 5 artics being delivered per year. https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/news/medi ... ction-line

[tonyp]

This media release includes the reference to a minimum of 29 rigids (built locally by Precision Buses) and 5 artics being delivered per year. https://www.premier.sa.gov.au/news/medi ... ction-line

Thanks for that. It's more a case of reading between the lines than on the lines! I can see the mathematics and the one definite: that 29 buses a year are rigids and will be built by Precision in Adelaide. The other five will be artics and will be built who knows by whom and where. The only manufacturer building artics in Australia at present is Volgren.

[Bus Suggestions]

New artics for Adelaide will definitely be interesting, moreso if Precision bodies them (I believe we are yet to see a Bustech-designed artic), although I'd say it's not likely.

[385BUZ]

New artics for Adelaide will definitely be interesting, moreso if Precision bodies them (I believe we are yet to see a Bustech-designed artic), although I'd say it's not likely.

That's almost a definite no. I believe LCBS (a VERY loyal Bustech buyer) up here tried to get Bustech to make artics, but they ended up with volgren ones instead.

[Tim Williams]

I would expect that Custom will build the artics, with such a small production number and I believe the existing combo/high floor design will prevail. From a practical aspect, Adelaide Metro expects its large number of artics (180????) to be virtually "go anywhere" buses, which naturally includes the ups and downs of our road system. So, just as double deckers cannot go everywhere, neither could full low floor artics.

[Tim Williams]

I have just checked in Australian Bus Fleet Lists and for the 3 Adelaide Metro contractors there are 183 artics oout of a total fleet of 1,041 buses, which represents nearly 17.6%.

WE do, apparently, love our artics here in Adelaide, but I must agree that they do shift large numbers of people efficiently, such as on the O-Bahn and also school students.

[tonyp]

I would expect that Custom will build the artics, with such a small production number and I believe the existing combo/high floor design will prevail. From a practical aspect, Adelaide Metro expects its large number of artics (180????) to be virtually "go anywhere" buses, which naturally includes the ups and downs of our road system. So, just as double deckers cannot go everywhere, neither could full low floor artics.

You should see the standard of roads that Nowra Coaches' five new low-floor Volgren artics traverse in the rural Shoalhaven region! I have absolutely no doubt about their suitability for any road conditions - as much as any low-floor rigid bus. Double deckers on the other hand you'd never run here. If you didn't have one toppling into a ditch, you'd be sideswiping the top deck on trees.

There's absolutely no reason for the high-floor design in urban use, especially now that all-door loading has been introduced. They'd be mad not to have stepless doorways.

I'm not sure that the new Custom is prepared to go back into artics. What do you think Tim? Volgren has the whole Australian (and some international) market and huge experience with this bus model and now they're doing an "apprenticeship" with double artics.

[BusFan23]

I do see the problem with low-entry high floor buses like the CB80s and CB60 Combos. I actually really like them


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tim Williams]

Tonyp's point regarding the step free access for all door boarding on the artics is valid, but I am not familiar with roads in the Shoalhaven region (despite having attended a couple of BusNSW conferences there!), but as an example of road profile problems here in Adelaide, a few of the bus routes, that travel along fairly minor roads that cross railway lines, where the roads climb up and go back down, short distances, either side of the lines. The current combo artics can traverse these roads, but I doubt full low floors would as their components (including the turntable apparatus) are naturally lower mounted.

The answer though is simple, have two types of artic, the "go anywhere" ones (particularly suitable for school and less intensive services) and the full low floor for the high load trunk routes, including O-Bahn routes. However, there would need to be a change mindset here and with only 5 artic deliveries per year, at present, this would be a long term project.

As far as the supplier(s) are concerned, I have no feel for this. However, Volgren would seem to be the logical choice (existing suitable designs and very competent products), nevertheless it would not surprise me if Custom did produce the small numbers required, using their existing (I suppose I should say erstwhile) design!!

[Bovways]

... it would not surprise me if Custom did produce the small numbers required, using their existing (I suppose I should say erstwhile) design!!

It's my understanding that there's an awful lot of CB80 lurking in the "new" Custom Endeavor; look at the side panels below the window line between the axles for example, or many of the interior components. As such, I can't imagine why Customs could not easily build an artic Endeavour.

[385BUZ]

... it would not surprise me if Custom did produce the small numbers required, using their existing (I suppose I should say erstwhile) design!!

It's my understanding that there's an awful lot of CB80 lurking in the "new" Custom Endeavor; look at the side panels below the window line between the axles for example, or many of the interior components. As such, I can't imagine why Customs could not easily build an artic Endeavour.

Endeavors are based off the Denning Phoenix Low Floor. Although, of course they would reuse some components from the CB80. Still, they will receive orders (from someone) for them and therefore they will/could build them.

[TA3001]

I thought the CB80s were bad. Now I'd almost be pleading for some of these to hit the streets in lieu of what currently is.

They do look more presentable, without being ridden with botched ultra-modern touchup attempts like the other brand. They do have a resemblance to 1318's body.

And the NSW livery looks a lot more presentable than the current disaster that is the AdMet V3 livery.

[385BUZ]

They do look more presentable, without being ridden with botched ultra-modern touchup attempts like the other brand.

Can you please describe these ultra-modern touchup attempts??

They do have a resemblance to 1318's body.

Wow - you're actually right.

And the NSW livery looks a lot more presentable than the current disaster that is the AdMet V3 livery.

I have to agree. All capital cities liverys (excl. Hobart and Darwin) Look much more presentable than the Admet V3. The Endeavour would have looked great in the V2 - which was my favourite of the 3 liverys.

[TA3001]

Just look at anything from 1046 or newer, then you'll know exactly what I mean.

The current CC body resembles a normal bus, which is not the case with anything from 1973-1999/1020-10XX, plus 1906 and 1907.

[tonyp]

Tonyp's point regarding the step free access for all door boarding on the artics is valid, but I am not familiar with roads in the Shoalhaven region (despite having attended a couple of BusNSW conferences there!), but as an example of road profile problems here in Adelaide, a few of the bus routes, that travel along fairly minor roads that cross railway lines, where the roads climb up and go back down, short distances, either side of the lines. The current combo artics can traverse these roads, but I doubt full low floors would as their components (including the turntable apparatus) are naturally lower mounted.

The answer though is simple, have two types of artic, the "go anywhere" ones (particularly suitable for school and less intensive services) and the full low floor for the high load trunk routes, including O-Bahn routes. However, there would need to be a change mindset here and with only 5 artic deliveries per year, at present, this would be a long term project.

There's normally almost no route engineering that would be required to operate artics (unlike double deckers), but if some feature or two along a route has a problem with rampover angle you just modify it so that the bus can clear it rather than run a fleet of passenger-unfriendly buses just because of a couple of minor obstacles on the routes that can be fixed.

[Tim Williams]

Yes tonyp, I take your point, but changing the road profile on a few of these roads would not be an easy task as the rail crossings I am thinking of are in inner, older suburbs with side roads joining and buildings close to the roads. These would be costly projects and would be the responsibility of the particular local councils - so best of luck that!!

AS mentioned previously, with present artic deliveries of 5 per year and a relatively modern artic fleet of 183 buses, it will take a long time. Naturally deliveries will have to speed up, down the track, as there is an age limit of 25 years!

For Adelaide, the only areas/routes I could see double deckers running usefully would be the Adelaide Hills (to Mount Barker etc.) routes, where the 2 existing DD's are based and maybe Norlunga (south) and Elizabeth (north) to and from Adelaide - comparatively long distance express routes. DD's would have worked well on the O-Bahn services (few stops and express running, with high passenger loads) but the bridges and tunnel were not built for DD's.

[Bovways]

It's my understanding that there's an awful lot of CB80 lurking in the "new" Custom Endeavor; look at the side panels below the window line between the axles for example, or many of the interior components. As such, I can't imagine why Customs could not easily build an artic Endeavour.

Endeavors are based off the Denning Phoenix Low Floor. Although, of course they would reuse some components from the CB80. Still, they will receive orders (from someone) for them and therefore they will/could build them.

Is this definite? Yes, the new Customs school bus is a Denning design. The Endeavour however has the proportions, side windows and window spacing, side panels, windscreen and most of the interior common with the CB80. I am sure I have previously read that it was a facelifted CB80, fitted with new panels above the windows, plus new front and rear ends; similar how Volgren turned its CR228L into the Optimus. Or is there a new frame lurking under all those CB80 components?

[385BUZ]

That's a definite mate. I suggest you have a look at some pics for comparison.

Here's an endeavor:
https://www.custombus.com.au/industry-n ... ity-buses/

Here's a phoenix low floor:
https://www.busaustralia.com/gallery/di ... =152&pos=8

Here's a CB80
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sy ... c_Park.jpg

[tonyp]

Is the Phoenix actually a low floor or a low entry?

The rear side window cutouts on the Endeavour are probably the same on the inside face of the side bulkhead as the CB 80. It's just that the bonded glazing on the outside has been applied in a continuous straight line. Same as the Volgren Optimus. You can see it in this photo of an Optimus before the glazing has been fitted:

[Bovways]

That's a definite mate. I suggest you have a look at some pics for comparison.

Are you basing this on knowledge from Custom Denning or just based on looks?
Just saying the Endeavour is based on the Phoenix as they both have bonded window lines that are straight top and bottom doesn't make the argument to me.
For example; CB80 and Endeavour have the same windscreen and front quarter windows.
If you compare a CB80 and an Endeavour that both have gasket mounted (rather than bonded) windows you will see the side glass, pillars etc are all in the same place. Same as the joins between the side panels on the drivers' side.
Plus as I have mentioned, most of the interior panels, dashboards etc are interchangeable between a CB80 and an Endeavour.