On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 20:12:32 +0100, James Farrar
wrote:

And then they get hoots of derision from the passengers on the
deliberately-delayed service when they tell them they are "regulating
the service" (as heard on the Jubilee Line at Bridge).

Quite. There are arguments for doing this on a railway, where there
are limited opportunities to send an additional vehicle via an
unaffected route to take up the delayed service's place, for example.
With buses, however, there is much more flexibility (provided the
money is there) to resolve the situation without inconveniencing other
passengers who are not already delayed.

Incidentally, I do agree with the idea of bus drivers and control
being in radio contact - this can, of course, be used for other forms
of service regulation, reporting problems, monitoring delays, asking
for relief vehicles to be sent and even (if set up with on-bus PA) to
allow control to advise passengers of problems elsewhere on the system
(a word which sadly doesn't usually apply to bus operations in the
UK). Just not the idea of delaying buses to fill the gap...

Neil

--
Neil Williams
is a valid email address, but is sent to /dev/null.
Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me.