On 21 Mar, 10:34, Paul Corfield wrote:

On 21 Mar 2009 09:24:57 GMT, James Farrar
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 05:52:05 -0700 (PDT), MIG
wrote:

But in practice, for years now, you have to signal or ring at every
stop or the bus is likely not to stop.

I agree with this and that's why the consultation proposal to make
this mandatory for every stop makes a great deal of sense.

Absolutely.

I'm intrigued how the OP could fall foul of the practice "again" - surely
after the first time you would learn to always signal?

Actually re-reading what MIG said I agree with the "always ring the
bell" part in order to get the bus to stop. The new policy was supposed
to ensure that if a passenger was at any stop that a bus would pull up
on the assumption they wished to board - no need to stick your arm out.
I'd agree it's safer to do so given the uncertainty as to what policy
applies. *I shall ask a question elsewhere and see if someone else knows
the answer.


I stupidly never responded to the consultation but I absolutely hate
that idea, i.e. that any passing bus would have to stop if there were
passengers at the bus stop, and I hope it never happens.

"Batman55" wrote in message
...
"peter" wrote in message
...
Well, what is the current rule regarding compulsory (white) bus stops?

Up to a few years ago the rule was clear, even if frequently flouted.
LT publicity clearly stated that at compulsory bus stops all day buses
would stop without being signalled. Then bus drivers started to get
more aggressive in ignoring the distinction and brushing aside
complaints from passengers, often denying that there was any such rule
(‘I’m a bus driver so I should know’ was one response I received).
Around the same time any reference to compulsory bus stops disappeared
from LT publicity, and subsequently several posts here and elsewhere
referred to the demise of the rule.

Being a fairly literal sort of chap, my take is that the rule has not
been expressly countermanded and so it is still theoretically in
force. The other day when I (inadvertently) fell foul of the practice
again I complained to London Buses, and received a response which
included the words:

“During training, drivers are instructed to stop at all white
compulsory stops and to be fully alert and aware of passengers wishing
to board at red request stops. I am sorry you have had reason to
report the contrary on this occasion.”

So it seems the rule is still in force. It would be nice if London
Buses acknowledged this in their publicity, and even nicer if drivers
observed it!

Peter

The word "compulsory" disappered from the stop signs years ago. Not yet
replaced with "pot luck" but should be!

MaxB

How do you tell the difference between a compulsory bus stop and one, where
passengers signal to the driver?

"Barry Salter" wrote in message
...
peter wrote:
Well, what is the current rule regarding compulsory (white) bus stops?

Good question. There was a proposal floated that ALL bus stops would be
treated as a hybrid of the two types, based on observation of "normal"
practice. Namely:

1) All buses SHOULD stop at a bus stop if it looks like someone wishes to
board.

2) If a passenger wishes to alight, they SHOULD ring the bell.

One time, I can remember that a woman rang the bell only just as ths bus was
passing the stop where she wanted to alight. Nobody else had rung the bell.

When she asked the bus driver why she didn't stop, he told her that it was
because she did not ring it in time. This was, apparently, not an acceptable
response to the woman, who started calling the driver names.

On Mar 21, 1:22�pm, wrote:
"Barry Salter" wrote in message

... peter wrote:
Well, what is the current rule regarding compulsory (white) bus stops?

Good question. There was a proposal floated that ALL bus stops would be
treated as a hybrid of the two types, based on observation of "normal"
practice. Namely:

�1) All buses SHOULD stop at a bus stop if it looks like someone wishes to
board.

�2) If a passenger wishes to alight, they SHOULD ring the bell.

One time, I can remember that a woman rang the bell only just as ths bus was
passing the stop where she wanted to alight. Nobody else had rung the bell.

When she asked the bus driver why she didn't stop, he told her that it was
because she did not ring it in time. This was, apparently, not an acceptable
response to the woman, who started calling the driver names.

Sorry to sound a discorant note amongst the overwhelming trend in this
discussion, but why on Earth should buses not stop at compulosory
stops, even if there are no passengers there? The object of the
exercise is to provide a SERVICE, not just to run a bus from one
terminating point to the next, as quickly as possible, hopefully with
as few passengers to inconvenience the speedy passage, so that the
driver can have as long a break as possible at each end.

I am sick and tired of the generally lazy dumbing down of everything
connected with public transport. In theory (if not in practice) are
buses not meant to run to a timetable? Surely that timetable is
predicated on at least a few stops along the route? If the buses were
to stick a little closer to this (for which stopping at even "empty"
bus stops would be an aide), we would not perhaps then have the
ridiculous saga of buses stopping for up to 6 or 7 minutes "to
regulate the flow", or dawdling at traffic lights, or stopping just
before an inspector's location - all of which regularly happen on the
routes I use in Fulham, the 28 and 295.

Being many times bitten as it were, I now treat ALL stops as if they
were "Request", and always ring the bell or hold my hand out. But I
have occasionally been on a 28 bus in Wandsworth Bridge Road that has
not stopped even when I have rung the bell - because the bus driver
did not like the look of the gang of schoochildren waiting at the
Compulsory stop. On one occasion, because the bus was so crowded and
driving so violently, I couldn't get to the door in time and was taken
to the next stop, despite a hail of ringing! The driver's attitude,
when I eventually got to him was one of "couldn't care less". Sums it
all up really.

Marc.

In message , at 13:34:01 on
Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Paul Corfield remarked:
Yes and I have seen the exact opposite happy - bell rung twice, in good
time for the stop, and the bus drives straight past and the driver
alleges not hearing the bell.

That's easily solved with a light next to the driver that comes on as
soon as someone rings a bell, saying "STOPPING". All my local buses have
one.
--
Roland Perry

On Mar 21, 2:36*pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:34:01 on
Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Paul Corfield remarked:

Yes and I have seen the exact opposite happy - bell rung twice, in good
time for the stop, and the bus drives straight past and the driver
alleges not hearing the bell.

That's easily solved with a light next to the driver that comes on as
soon as someone rings a bell, saying "STOPPING". All my local buses have
one.

I've often wondered: does that light visible to passengers after you
ding already correspond to something the driver can't ignore (tangent
on safety comes to mind) or is is just to inform other passengers that
someone has already dung?

There is still often a chorus of dings, particularly on bendys,
because of a five-second gap between pressing and the ding. That
could eat up quite a lot of the stopping distance too.

In message
, at
07:50:53 on Sat, 21 Mar 2009, MIG
remarked:
Yes and I have seen the exact opposite happy - bell rung twice, in good
time for the stop, and the bus drives straight past and the driver
alleges not hearing the bell.

That's easily solved with a light next to the driver that comes on as
soon as someone rings a bell, saying "STOPPING". All my local buses have
one.

I've often wondered: does that light visible to passengers after you
ding already correspond to something the driver can't ignore (tangent
on safety comes to mind) or is is just to inform other passengers that
someone has already dung?

Mainly the latter, but it would also settle arguments with the driver as
to whether the ding had been dung.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 15:19:37 on
Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Paul Corfield remarked:
Yes and I have seen the exact opposite happy - bell rung twice, in good
time for the stop, and the bus drives straight past and the driver
alleges not hearing the bell.

That's easily solved with a light next to the driver that comes on as
soon as someone rings a bell, saying "STOPPING". All my local buses have
one.

Yes Roland - and guess what? All London buses have warning lights on
their dashboards. The point I was making, clearly very badly, was that
sometimes drivers and passengers make mistakes or act like fools in
amongst all the times that the system works correctly.

Oh well, I was suggesting something to help the allegedly deaf driver,
but if he's allegedly daft instead there's a limit to what lights can
do...
--
Roland Perry

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On Mar 21, 2:36 pm, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 13:34:01 on
Sat, 21 Mar 2009, Paul Corfield remarked:

Yes and I have seen the exact opposite happy - bell rung twice, in good
time for the stop, and the bus drives straight past and the driver
alleges not hearing the bell.

That's easily solved with a light next to the driver that comes on as
soon as someone rings a bell, saying "STOPPING". All my local buses have
one.

I've often wondered: does that light visible to passengers after you
ding already correspond to something the driver can't ignore (tangent
on safety comes to mind) or is is just to inform other passengers that
someone has already dung?

There is still often a chorus of dings, particularly on bendys,
because of a five-second gap between pressing and the ding. That
could eat up quite a lot of the stopping distance too.

The delay between pressing the button and the bell on the bendis is more
like 3 seconds, actually.

That delay has only been around a year or so, and I don't know why. Earlier,
the bell would ring as soon as you hit the button on all bendis. But now,
some bendis have the delay while others do not.

Anybody know why? Is this connected with iBus?

On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 04:25:07 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

I stupidly never responded to the consultation but I absolutely hate
that idea, i.e. that any passing bus would have to stop if there were
passengers at the bus stop, and I hope it never happens.

It works extremely well in Germany, though this is because stops with
more than one or two routes are not common. It's far more friendly
than the typical UK situation with 4 buses head to tail and another
one overtaking, which is usually the one you want.

It's usual to wave a bus through and visibly step back from the kerb
if you do *not* want it.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.