Menu
 
North East Buses Local Bus Scene Operations, Management & Infrastructure CAZ violations

CAZ violations

CAZ violations

 
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
 
Pages (3) Previous 1 2 3
Unber43



3,555
03 Jun 2023, 11:13 am #41
GNE had two CAZ Violations, thats 5436 (i think) Branded Prince Bishops on the 56, and 5507 on 6.
Unber43
03 Jun 2023, 11:13 am #41

GNE had two CAZ Violations, thats 5436 (i think) Branded Prince Bishops on the 56, and 5507 on 6.

Dan

Site Administrator

18,118
03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am #42
(03 Jun 2023, 11:13 am)Unber43 GNE had two CAZ Violations, thats 5436 (i think) Branded Prince Bishops on the 56, and 5507 on 6.


Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dan
03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am #42

(03 Jun 2023, 11:13 am)Unber43 GNE had two CAZ Violations, thats 5436 (i think) Branded Prince Bishops on the 56, and 5507 on 6.


Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

nova347



414
03 Jun 2023, 1:06 pm #43
(03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am)Dan Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't realise 5507 had been withdrawn either, it was at Deptford, then it went to Washington then Consett. I don't think there was any mention.
nova347
03 Jun 2023, 1:06 pm #43

(03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am)Dan Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn't realise 5507 had been withdrawn either, it was at Deptford, then it went to Washington then Consett. I don't think there was any mention.

F114TML



906
03 Jun 2023, 1:38 pm #44
Might wanna remove it from your fleetlist then
[Image: image.png]
F114TML
03 Jun 2023, 1:38 pm #44

Might wanna remove it from your fleetlist then
[Image: image.png]

Dan

Site Administrator

18,118
03 Jun 2023, 1:40 pm #45
(03 Jun 2023, 1:38 pm)F114TML Might wanna remove it from your fleetlist then
[Image: image.png]


It is based on the same list as bustimes - ie the fleet number in ETM.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dan
03 Jun 2023, 1:40 pm #45

(03 Jun 2023, 1:38 pm)F114TML Might wanna remove it from your fleetlist then
[Image: image.png]


It is based on the same list as bustimes - ie the fleet number in ETM.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unber43



3,555
03 Jun 2023, 2:13 pm #46
(03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am)Dan Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah true, but I saw the Prince Bishops on the 56 in person.
Unber43
03 Jun 2023, 2:13 pm #46

(03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am)Dan Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah true, but I saw the Prince Bishops on the 56 in person.

Dan

Site Administrator

18,118
03 Jun 2023, 2:37 pm #47
(03 Jun 2023, 2:13 pm)Unber43 Yeah true, but I saw the Prince Bishops on the 56 in person.


And it was fine to go into the CAZ.[Image: 734d3605e0aaa896e19a1fe326014150.jpg]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dan
03 Jun 2023, 2:37 pm #47

(03 Jun 2023, 2:13 pm)Unber43 Yeah true, but I saw the Prince Bishops on the 56 in person.


And it was fine to go into the CAZ.[Image: 734d3605e0aaa896e19a1fe326014150.jpg]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

missedbus



121
03 Jun 2023, 4:16 pm #48
The misconception here appears to be that Euro 6 = compliant and Euro 5 or below = non-compliant. It clearly isn't as simple as that, and some Euro 5 vehicles are clean enough to comply, as per the CAZ/ULEZ checker.
missedbus
03 Jun 2023, 4:16 pm #48

The misconception here appears to be that Euro 6 = compliant and Euro 5 or below = non-compliant. It clearly isn't as simple as that, and some Euro 5 vehicles are clean enough to comply, as per the CAZ/ULEZ checker.

Adrian



9,583
03 Jun 2023, 4:58 pm #49
(03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am)Dan Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Must be true, if it's on the Internet?!

Forum Moderator | Find NEB on facebook
Adrian
03 Jun 2023, 4:58 pm #49

(03 Jun 2023, 11:49 am)Dan Given that 5507 has been withdrawn, sold and is no longer in the fleet, I think you’ll find that it’s more likely a compliant Green Arrow with the wrong fleet number in ETM.

It’s probably worth highlighting when you are using bustimes, so others know to take what you’re saying with a pinch of salt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Must be true, if it's on the Internet?!


Forum Moderator | Find NEB on facebook

MurdnunoC



3,975
03 Jun 2023, 5:01 pm #50
(03 Jun 2023, 4:58 pm)Adrian Must be true, if it's on the Internet?!

Must be true, if Unber43 imagined it.
MurdnunoC
03 Jun 2023, 5:01 pm #50

(03 Jun 2023, 4:58 pm)Adrian Must be true, if it's on the Internet?!

Must be true, if Unber43 imagined it.

Unber43



3,555
03 Jun 2023, 8:26 pm #51
It said on the cab

This bus is NOT CAZ Compliant
Unber43
03 Jun 2023, 8:26 pm #51

It said on the cab

This bus is NOT CAZ Compliant

Dan

Site Administrator

18,118
04 Jun 2023, 5:54 am #52
(03 Jun 2023, 8:26 pm)Unber43 It said on the cab

This bus is NOT CAZ Compliant


But - crucially - the Govt website says there is no charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dan
04 Jun 2023, 5:54 am #52

(03 Jun 2023, 8:26 pm)Unber43 It said on the cab

This bus is NOT CAZ Compliant


But - crucially - the Govt website says there is no charge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aaron21



785
27 Oct 2023, 11:43 am #53
Just seen 6132 leaving Haymarket working 307 to North Shields. £50 out of the wallets
Aaron21
27 Oct 2023, 11:43 am #53

Just seen 6132 leaving Haymarket working 307 to North Shields. £50 out of the wallets

N391OTY



144
27 Oct 2023, 12:11 pm #54
(27 Oct 2023, 11:43 am)Aaron21 Just seen 6132 leaving Haymarket working 307 to North Shields. £50 out of the wallets

I see at least one long Omnidekka (6167 and co.) on the number 1 every day. Presuming these are not CAZ compliant either. Happy to be corrected though.
N391OTY
27 Oct 2023, 12:11 pm #54

(27 Oct 2023, 11:43 am)Aaron21 Just seen 6132 leaving Haymarket working 307 to North Shields. £50 out of the wallets

I see at least one long Omnidekka (6167 and co.) on the number 1 every day. Presuming these are not CAZ compliant either. Happy to be corrected though.

Unber43



3,555
27 Oct 2023, 12:17 pm #55
(27 Oct 2023, 12:11 pm)N391OTY I see at least one long Omnidekka (6167 and co.) on the number 1 every day. Presuming these are not CAZ compliant either. Happy to be corrected though.
The long OmniDekkas are, none of the other ones are I think
Unber43
27 Oct 2023, 12:17 pm #55

(27 Oct 2023, 12:11 pm)N391OTY I see at least one long Omnidekka (6167 and co.) on the number 1 every day. Presuming these are not CAZ compliant either. Happy to be corrected though.
The long OmniDekkas are, none of the other ones are I think

nova347



414
03 Feb 2024, 8:26 pm #56
6182 (Voyager Volvo B9TL Wright Eclipse Gemini), was on the X71/X72 today, and therefore a CAZ violation
nova347
03 Feb 2024, 8:26 pm #56

6182 (Voyager Volvo B9TL Wright Eclipse Gemini), was on the X71/X72 today, and therefore a CAZ violation

Adrian



9,583
04 Feb 2024, 3:42 pm #57
(03 Feb 2024, 8:26 pm)nova347 6182 (Voyager Volvo B9TL Wright Eclipse Gemini), was on the X71/X72 today, and therefore a CAZ violation

Easy £50 for NCC! I wonder if Consett were particularly short?

Forum Moderator | Find NEB on facebook
Adrian
04 Feb 2024, 3:42 pm #57

(03 Feb 2024, 8:26 pm)nova347 6182 (Voyager Volvo B9TL Wright Eclipse Gemini), was on the X71/X72 today, and therefore a CAZ violation

Easy £50 for NCC! I wonder if Consett were particularly short?


Forum Moderator | Find NEB on facebook

Pages (3) Previous 1 2 3
 
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average