LDN: E400 B9 enters service on route 85- a test case for volvos

As far as I am aware, the ban is still there, and the volvo noise problem is still unresolved [I can hear the noisy volvos loud and clear every day- and it is very common now]. The order for the 3 VEs was just to test the B9 engines in service.
From observation in London, the engine noise problem becomes an issue after about 3 years in service. So the last batch of B7s - in Camberwell on routes 68/468 are still OK, but the older batches are effected.
We are talking about First, Metroline, Go Ahead and Arriva- all of them have a large fleet of volvos.
This is, of course, not only confined to London; When I visited Norwich earlier this week, First's fleet of volvo B7 was also very noisy.

Regards

Yoram

原帖由 yblumann 於 2008-10-17 21:32 發表
As far as I am aware, the ban is still there, and the volvo noise problem is still unresolved . The order for the 3 VEs was just to test the B9 engines in service.
From observation in London, the eng ...

The order of VE is more to evaluate the combination of the B9TL chassis and the E400 bodywork as well. One other reason they took these 3 is they are the first production examples for the London Buses services - the unique B9 is anearly preproduction chassis and is, as said, a little bit different from the production B9TLs. In any case, they won't be just testing the engine, as the B9TL chassis has quite a bit of difference to the B7TL.

The noise of the B7TL's radiator is down to a fault of the termostat in the radiator, which you would have read from LOTS anyway. It's a common fault which affects not only the B7TL, but also the whole B7L range and, for the matter, B10TL as well (which is less noticable as HK is so hot that the cooling fan is on full power much of the time anyway). Frankly though, it's up to the operators to fix it - and it explains why it is not such a major problem for specific operators (Lothian and Transdev Blazefield for example, which I hardly see one suffer the problem). The ultimate solution is, obviously, for Volvo to redesign the cooling system and fit them onto the in service vehicles, but it doesn't look to be something that Volvo think is worth doing.

I most certainly agree that the excessive noise generated by the volvo engines has much to do with good engineering. If you are a Londoner, and you know your bus operators, garages, you can certainly tell which opeator has good engineering facilities....
Bear in mind that some of the bus companies [Go Ahead and Arriva for instance] have engineering contracts with Volvo directly, so a problem like this will  be the responsibility of volvo to fix.

I am not that familiar with engines and certainly not with the outlay of volvo engines,  to me, the noise sounds like a cooling system's fan going wrong- say- an air conditioning plant.

Another interesting feature is the lack of official comments from the companies, London buses or volvo- nobody wants to have anything said on record..

The problem in London was first noticed when an official complaint was lodged - via the City of Westminster noise officer- to London buses; residents in certain road served by 80 volvos on 4 routes [First's 7 23 28 31 328] made a complaint. Following that, noise measurements were taken,and the complaint was found to be justified.   
[I  know the residents society that made the complaint!]
another considertation is the concentration of volvo buses on certain roads and corridors, which really amplify and multiply the noise.
So, when the contract for route 7 was awarded, London Buses requested 'anything but Volvos', and the route is now operated by Scanias [and rarely by tridents].
Volvo were officially asked to fix the problem, as you mention above. To date, and I have it on very good engineering authority, this has not been done.

Why order 3 buses and how route 85 was chosen?
There was a plan to extend route 85 at the Kingston end, requirng 3 buses. Kingston does not have a large number of volvo buses serving the town [213 111 only] , and the 85 is on it;s own most of the way.
Hence the order for the 3 B9s. in the meanwhile, the plan to extend the 85 was cancelled!

regards

Yoram

原帖由 yblumann 於 2008-10-18 05:32 發表
From observation in London, the engine noise problem becomes an issue after about 3 years in service

So they are not so noisy when they first entered service?

The core problem is the noise from the cooling system. I think it's the same case of the B9 in HK

The noise problem does not start until the buses are a few years old, so new buses are OK, but over 2-3 years into their service, the noise problem starts...
so we have to wait till 2010 at least before we know if the B9s are noisy or not!

regards

原帖由 yblumann 於 2008-10-18 16:14 發表
I most certainly agree that the excessive noise generated by the volvo engines has much to do with good engineering. If you are a Londoner, and you know your bus operators, garages, you can certainly  ...

No, the official version was out this year that the problem was down to the engine cooling system, and more specifically, the temperature sensor in the radiator. It senses the temperature of the engine compartment and control the speed of the cooling fan accordingly. If the sensor faults, the cooling fan will be turned up to full speed as a fail-safe measure, making sure the engine does not get overheat. This is when the B7TL becomes noisy - it has nothing to do with the engine itself, otherwise you would have heard that on every single B7.

The decision of putting the VEs to Putney is just down to the additional buses need for the now defuncted extension of the 85 - it has nothing to do with how many B7 is running around Kingston. And of all, the VEs are just for evaluation purpose. You can bet they will make their way to other Putney services, the 14, 22, 74 and 430 for instance, before very long.

原帖由 yblumann 於 2008-10-18 18:11 發表
so we have to wait till 2010 at least before we know if the B9s are noisy or not!

The production 2-axle B9TLs has a new engine cooling system - and one would hope it has fixed the problem once and for all. I have been on these things quite a few times, and they are unbelievably quiet - even quieter than the B7TL without its radiator problems.

I believe the B9TLs in KMB fleet has the old radiators (like the B7TL) as well, and if so, they will be affected in time too.

原帖由 NV58 於 2008-10-19 04:17 發表

I believe the B9TLs in KMB fleet has the old radiators (like the B7TL) as well, and if so, they will be affected in time too.

Didnt take long to proof your statement. Come down and try one of the MM reg ones on 102...............

Well,
OK, Thanks, I haven't read the official press release from Volvo; [I will be more precise next time !]
At the end of the day,  the problem is still there and getting worse; complaints keep flooding in.
The fact is that if many Volvos serve a certain location, the cumulative noise is quite high- and causes real nuisance.  You can bear it with one bus, but try to get some sleep or to concentrate on whatever you do when this noise is so bad and keep happening regularly- where there are many such buses in service!
Add to that the fact that 'aging' ,makes this problem worse, with the batch of 60 B7s delivered to Go Ahead beginning to be very noisy- and that heavy engineering contract is with Volvo themselves- and each of us can draw their own conclusions!
[what I mean is that the longer the bus is in service, the more likely it is to be noisy!]
Route 85:  
The 'politics' here is not as simple as implied:
The company could have ordered what they usually order nowadays- Tridents;
For example, they could have ordered 3 Tridents, and even negotiate allocating those 3 Tridents into SW garage, transferring 3 weevils [the pet name for the Wright bodied Volvo B7- class code WVL] to AF.
And the company would wait for London Buses confirmation that the 85 would actually be extended.
There were some discussions between London Buses and Go Ahead regarding the Volvo orders and their allocation.  Go Ahead was given the go ahead to order B9s with E400 bodies for route 85 to test them in service.
From what I understand, after the experience with the B7s sensor problems, there was some reluctance regarding the B9, notwithstanding Volvo's assurance that the problem was solved with the introduction of the B9..

The official allocation is to route 85. If they work onto other AF routes, well and good, but this is not the official allocation.

Oh, yes: after 2 days in service, the Volvos were sent back to Volvo for modifications, and have not returned to service yet.

It is not only the Wright bodied Volvos that are affected, but also the President, Alx400 and East Lancs bodied Volvos too.
[As mentioned before, some garages are better than others!]

smal- regards to Jimmy- I hope he is having fun in HK!

I am not anti-Volvo by the way....

Best wishes,
Yoram