On 3 Oct, 13:11, "tim....." wrote:
"MIG" wrote in message

ups.com...





On 3 Oct, 12:25, "tim....." wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

groups.com...

On Oct 3, 10:37 am, MIG wrote:

I think bendy buses are WRONG in every way, but I have actually met
one person who likes them

Ok , so what exactly is wrong with them?

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

It can't be just because they are bendy, can it?

tim

They may be ideal for airport transit in open spaces, but not for the
streets of London.

In general, buses could be a slower but more pleasant alternative to
the Underground, instead of which the slower alternative now has the
ambience of the Underground (standing in a long thing).

But more specifically

1) I almost always have to stand if I use them, because they have less
seats.

2) They add to the many hazards I face when cycling.

3) The constantly block pedestrian crossings.

4) They can't legally move into yellow box junctions that have less
than 18 m of space beyond, thereby holding up a queue of smaller
vehicles that could have done (or more likely just blocking it
anyway).

and any other bleedin obvious reasons why 18 m vehicles might not be
appropriate for the winding narrow streets of an old city.

Ah, so most of the people that you know who don't like them
are other road users and not passengers.

That is clear now.


I was only writing for myself, but as a passenger I don't like them
because of having to stand, but in that situation I am indeed
insulated from the concerns of the pedestrians affected by the vehicle
that I am in.

On Oct 3, 1:22 pm, MIG wrote:
I was only writing for myself, but as a passenger I don't like them
because of having to stand, but in that situation I am indeed
insulated from the concerns of the pedestrians affected by the vehicle
that I am in.

The reason you normally have to stand on a bendy is that they've only
been deployed on the busiest routes where you'd be standing regardless
of what bus they use - bendies only have a fraction fewer seats. And
no one who's stood on a double decker with more than a handful of
other people would volunteer to do it again.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

Mr Thant wrote:

The reason you normally have to stand on a bendy is that they've only
been deployed on the busiest routes where you'd be standing regardless
of what bus they use - bendies only have a fraction fewer seats. And
no one who's stood on a double decker with more than a handful of
other people would volunteer to do it again.

Here we have both the bendy 25 and double decker 86 running between
Stratford and Ilford on the same route. And I'd much prefer to stand on the
86 than to stand on the 25 any day.

In article . com,
(Boltar) wrote:

Theres been the usual talking heads and waffle on local radio and in
the papers about getting rid of bendy buses again after another one
caught fire. Flammability aside I rather like them. They hoover up the
passengers , theres usual plenty of room , boarding is easy , they
have a nice ride and at the front are rather quiet.

A better question would be - who the hell thought double deckers were
ever a good idea? Apart from taking up less roadspace do they have a
single redeeming feature? They're difficult to board , cramped
inside , the stairs are a nightmare especially if the driver moves off
before you've finished climbing them and 2 people toppled onto you.
The top deck half the time is full of scowling youths at the back, its
low , hot in the sun and sways around a lot and you're always at risk
from a braindead driver and low bridge/tree combination. I can't stand
them.

As a cyclist I hate them. They are too long for the roads.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

At 04:46:41 on Wed, 3 Oct 2007 MIG opined:-

On 3 Oct, 12:25, "tim....." wrote:
"Boltar" wrote in message

oups.com...

On Oct 3, 10:37 am, MIG wrote:

I think bendy buses are WRONG in every way, but I have actually met
one person who likes them

Ok , so what exactly is wrong with them?

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

It can't be just because they are bendy, can it?

tim


They may be ideal for airport transit in open spaces, but not for the
streets of London.

In general, buses could be a slower but more pleasant alternative to
the Underground, instead of which the slower alternative now has the
ambience of the Underground (standing in a long thing).

But more specifically

1) I almost always have to stand if I use them, because they have less
seats.

2) They add to the many hazards I face when cycling.

3) The constantly block pedestrian crossings.

4) They can't legally move into yellow box junctions that have less
than 18 m of space beyond, thereby holding up a queue of smaller
vehicles that could have done (or more likely just blocking it
anyway).

and any other bleedin obvious reasons why 18 m vehicles might not be
appropriate for the winding narrow streets of an old city.

One of their advantages is said to be that, with all doors being used
for both entry and exit, they are quicker to load. Couldn't this be
done also with double-deckers?

On 3 Oct, 14:29, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:
Mr Thant wrote:
The reason you normally have to stand on a bendy is that they've only
been deployed on the busiest routes where you'd be standing regardless
of what bus they use - bendies only have a fraction fewer seats. And
no one who's stood on a double decker with more than a handful of
other people would volunteer to do it again.

Here we have both the bendy 25 and double decker 86 running between
Stratford and Ilford on the same route. And I'd much prefer to stand on the
86 than to stand on the 25 any day.

I would similarly prefer the 24 to the 29 and the 53 to the 453. I
know I'm not alone in that.

On 3 Oct, 14:57, MIG wrote:
The reason you normally have to stand on a bendy is that they've only
been deployed on the busiest routes where you'd be standing regardless
of what bus they use - bendies only have a fraction fewer seats. And
no one who's stood on a double decker with more than a handful of
other people would volunteer to do it again.

Here we have both the bendy 25 and double decker 86 running between
Stratford and Ilford on the same route. And I'd much prefer to stand on the
86 than to stand on the 25 any day.

I would similarly prefer the 24 to the 29 and the 53 to the 453. I
know I'm not alone in that.

I prefer, and regularly chose when I lived in the area, to stand on
the 29 than any of the also-standing-room-only deckers on the Finsbury
Park-Camden corridor. Deckers are too narrow for standing and the
perpetual front-to-back passenger flow is very annoying if you're
going more than a couple of stops.

[also at Thoss - bendies have more doors than deckers. Unless you're
going to turn the entire bottom deck into doors, which is a bit
pointless, then you simply can't get the same passenger throughput]

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, thoss wrote:

One of their advantages is said to be that, with all doors being used
for both entry and exit, they are quicker to load. Couldn't this be
done also with double-deckers?

You've still got the stairs in a double-decker, though, so you just move
the bottleneck.

tom

--
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by
stupidity -- Hanlon's Razor

On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Boltar wrote:

Theres been the usual talking heads and waffle on local radio and in the
papers about getting rid of bendy buses again after another one caught
fire. Flammability aside I rather like them. They hoover up the
passengers , theres usual plenty of room , boarding is easy , they have
a nice ride and at the front are rather quiet.

I don't mind them. In light loads, i prefer double-deckers, because you
can sit up top and have a nice view. In heavy loads, bendies are better
because they're easier to get on and off, and they don't stop for as long.

That's with my passenger hat on, anyway. With my cyclist hat on, they're
massive obstructions, and at worst, terrifying mobile deathtraps.

A better question would be - who the hell thought double deckers were
ever a good idea? Apart from taking up less roadspace do they have a
single redeeming feature?

No, but that one feature is good enough - 50% more people in the same
area = win.

Double-decker bendies are the future, i reckon.

tom

--
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by
stupidity -- Hanlon's Razor

On 3 Oct, 15:03, John B wrote:
On 3 Oct, 14:57, MIG wrote:

The reason you normally have to stand on a bendy is that they've only
been deployed on the busiest routes where you'd be standing regardless
of what bus they use - bendies only have a fraction fewer seats. And
no one who's stood on a double decker with more than a handful of
other people would volunteer to do it again.

Here we have both the bendy 25 and double decker 86 running between
Stratford and Ilford on the same route. And I'd much prefer to stand on the
86 than to stand on the 25 any day.

I would similarly prefer the 24 to the 29 and the 53 to the 453. I
know I'm not alone in that.

I prefer, and regularly chose when I lived in the area, to stand on
the 29 than any of the also-standing-room-only deckers on the Finsbury
Park-Camden corridor. Deckers are too narrow for standing and the
perpetual front-to-back passenger flow is very annoying if you're
going more than a couple of stops.

[also at Thoss - bendies have more doors than deckers. Unless you're
going to turn the entire bottom deck into doors, which is a bit
pointless, then you simply can't get the same passenger throughput]



Well, I only responded in the first place to say that I HAVE met
someone who likes them. Obviously there are one or two here as well
who like them.

But I really don't.