| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The 2007 Bus Roadeo; Who is going? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 6 2007, 11:35 AM (2,626 Views) | |
| newflyer_8008 | Sep 17 2007, 03:15 PM Post #51 |
|
A person with a transit intrest
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The roadeo wasnt all that bad, just we saw 7011 sitting in midvale scrap yards, just sitting there with the doors open and the vents open. but what i dont understand is how the hell do you forget to bring buses???? |
![]() |
|
| CACrafter88bk2504 | Sep 17 2007, 04:32 PM Post #52 |
|
Transit Historian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Lord no! Not 7011. They better not get rid of 7011. I still can't understand as to why SEPTA got rid of the Volvos as early as they did? Roxborough(Ridge & Paoli). 7009(Volvo). Route 9. That made sense to me. Them not bringing 7011 to the bus roadeo? Why? |
![]() |
|
| redarrow5591 | Sep 19 2007, 07:54 AM Post #53 |
|
Light Rail and Railroad Historian
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
From my sources, the Flx had a electrical fire when they powered it up two days before. Allegheny got themselves a new shop manager, with serious ties to the rotating resumes, and managed to get 7011 moved "Due to the exessive number of out of service artics." They flat out FORGOT to get a NABI and a Neo for the Roadeo. Most of the operators and mechanics was up in arms about that one. If Tom Collins was still running that show, THE BI-LEVELS WOULD'VE MADE A APPERANCE (Amtrak wouldn't be that selfish to allow a track to get taken out of service for an hour or two on a Saturday.) |
![]() |
|
| philabob1 | Sep 21 2007, 09:19 AM Post #54 |
|
Foamer
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
If you rode the Volvos every day (as I did for their entire tenure on SEPTA), you'd know the answer. The buses were 'dogs' from the get-go and SEPTA's maintenance efforts didn't help them at all. They were not suited for the Roxborough hills and failed often on them. The 'mid-ships' engine often threw exhaust into the bus bodies and the riders would choke and reek of diesel fumes. On one trip into Center City, the bus (I think it was 7005, but I can't say for sure) began filling with smoke. Traffic wasn't bad and the driver was moving as many of us were yelling to him about the smoke. He opened the front door and told us to open the roof hatches, which pushed the smoke out. When we got into town, several of us complained about this, and he came right back that he got us into town rather than pulling off on the expressway shoulder and sitting. Nice guy. Many of them leaked when it rained, both through the diaphragm and the roof. The diaphragms were often ripped (which at least let in a breeze to counteract the exhaust or the lack of AC). I was on a trip going up Henry Ave and the bridge at Valley Ave was flooded (a regular occurrence). The driver decided to go through it, finding out too late that the front wheel-well cover was loose, so water gushed right into the curbside of the bus, drenching a number of passengers in the front seats. The water was deep enough to get into the engine compartment and shut down the bus (7032, I recall). The op was not very pleased about the result - a bus going nowhere and a half-dozen wet passengers. The lack of weight in the rear section caused a great deal of swaying at speed, and I often saw riders leave the rear to stand in the front section on expressway trips because they couldn't take the motion (I witnessed one rider get off a bus at WTC and lose her lunch over the bridge railing into the Wissahickon Creek - and she must've asked the driver to wait for her, because he did). The separate motor for the AC was nice when it worked, but as the buses aged, this often was a feature that blew hot air. There were some buses that had rear sections cooler than front or vice versa - not sure how this happened, but I recall 7026 and 7033 in particular were ones to watch out for. SEPTA seemed to take good care of 7047, 7048 (the one with the oddball sign - taller letters than the others) and 7049, for some reason - they always seemed to be in good shape, and 7047 often showed up at events. I was surprised that 7011 turned out to be the one that got saved, but it could've been that it was one of the few that got the new paint scheme. Slippery weather basically took them out of commission. The theory was (and I'm guessing at this) that the mid-ships engine would 'pull' the rear section, but more often than not, the buses jacknifed in snow, ice, etc. (The theory changed with the Neos, going to rear engines and 'pushers', but they don't do much better in bad weather.) On 33, 48, and other 'straight and flat' routes, they were fine, but they didn't do so well on the 9 and 27, and I heard similar reports about their performance on the Frankford El express runs on I-95. As a rider, I don't miss the Volvos at all, except for 8590. That was a treat - always clean, cushioned seats, and a nice-running bus. Of course, part of this was that it was kept available for SEPTA big-wigs to use if needed. I once ran into it in Washington DC when it was new, where it must've carted some officials on a trip there. |
![]() |
|
| TRANSIT_FREAK | Sep 21 2007, 10:00 PM Post #55 |
![]()
to Life, Love & LOOT
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
OMG ISN'T THE RAIL RODEO ON SATURDAY |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · General Operations · Next Topic » |



![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)



2:00 AM Jul 13