they are very durable and for despite having undergone heavy use for many years are actually in fairly good shape

they run on diesel, the only fuel Division 6 (Venice) has. That is why these vehicles (and the diesel low floor 3000s) at this point are mostly exclusive to D6.

Because of air pollution reduction mandates that will eventually (or soon) ban diesel buses, Metro wants to get gasoline* hybrids to run from D6 (a strategically located facility for operating service along heavy westside lines) and is testing them, but the acquisition cost so far is causing sticker shock–they hope in a few years as the technology matures they’ll become affordable

BTW, some CNG equipment now runs out of D6–it is fuelled at the Big Blue Bus yard in Santa Monica** (mostly while deadheading at the close of service–D6 doesn’t operate late or weekends due to complaints from nearby neighborhoods about noise). This may happen for a while as an interim measure to keep D6 going until the hybrids are acquired.

*While the ARB/AQMD crowd are anti-diesel zealots they have classified gasoline as an alternative fuel

**As a observer of the often convoluted relationship between Metro and the munis, I have to think the negoiations for this arrangement would have been fascinating to witness.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/23630476@N06/2745754775

whence Damien “borrowed” the photo:

1992 TMC RTS runs on eastbound Line 20 along Wilshire Boulevard in the Koreatown/Wilshire Center neighborhood of Los Angeles.

This is in front of the Wiltern Theatre, and across the street from the Wilshire/Western Purple Line station.

The 1200-1502 series of Metro’s RTSs have seen so much. They originally arrived with methanol engines, but the fuel was eating the motors’ metal. They then briefly ran with ethanol engines, but those proved to be even less reliable than when methanol-powered. Finally, they are no powered by diesel.

Interestingly, I remember riding this very bus, 1447, a long time ago when it was on Line 447!

Judge Berzon in his dissent put heavy weigh on the Special Master’s expertise and severely critizes Judge Hatter’s ruling to not extend the decree. Well, I think Hatter while perhaps not as involved as Bliss (the Master) certainly was kept appraised. The Special Master in his last rulings showed signs of becoming aggrivated at the BRU’s intransigence. And I think that informed Hatter’s comments of the decree being “a less than perfect document. As a result, it is impossible to achieve absolute compliance” in ruling Metro had substantially complied with it.

Berzon also essentially takes at face value that non-compliance with the load factor requirement is a fault of Metro. I have been of the opinion it is a sign the decree was impractical, an agreement crafted by three groups (Metro Board members, the BRU leadership and the BRU’s lawyers) with no real understanding of the practical aspects of bus operations on surface streets in an urban environment.

We may never know the full story behind the decree’s creation. We know then L.A. Mayor Richard Riordan, who evidently played a key role in the Metro Board voting for it, has since been quoted as saying “entering into the consent decree was a mistake.” I have long suspected the Board was given incomplete or misleading information. I can’t provide anything but speculation as to how or why that happened, and 10+ years later don’t see any value in saying anything further on that topic.

The consent decree made Eric Mann–by being a named plantiff it provided credibility in the mainstream and probably opened a lot of doors for funding. But by using the decree to beat up on Metro relentless Mann has guaranteed his reputation will proceed him in any dealings with public entities whatever issue he is involved with henceforth, and nobody will sign an agreement with him again. Mann could have leveraged the decree to do things to benefit riders long after the decree expired. He selfishly instead sought short term attention at the expense of longterm viability. Cameras hardly turn up any more for BRU protests, and their full court press at the last fare hearing resulted in zero of what they asked for and didn’t stop the increase. If Metro revisits the possibility of service cuts in the next year due to the budget shortfall any BRU effort to stop it will likely also be more aimed at public attention than effectiveness. The high point is past and they are on the downward slide.

I’ll be curious if they have any luck with further appeals.