On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 04:45:52AM -0700, John B wrote:
On Oct 22, 12:27=A0pm, David Cantrell wrote:
Route 38 had a better service before it went all bendy. By which I mean
there were more seats (which were more comfortable) and a more frequent
service, with journey times being about the same. There was also less
fare-dodging.
But more standing capacity with bendies, right? Which is the important
thing when the issue is bus-you-can-get-on vs bus-you-can't.

I don't recall seeing a 38 that was so rammed that people couldn't get on -
neither pre- nor post-bendification. Certainly not two of them in a
row (and two RMs have about the same capacity as one Bendy). Although
sometimes you might have to *horror* go upstairs.

Occasionally I use the number 8. They're quite often full with many
people standing downstairs, but with plenty of seats available upstairs.
I conclude that most people are stupid cattle.

Aye, fair; while it's true that Inner London voted for Ken this time
round, and that Outer London reliably swings Tory, I do accept it
makes more sense for the outer boroughs to be included in the
administrative unit. It's kind-of annoying that their vote dictates
what happens on issues like bendies and pedestrianisation in the
centre, which is of peripheral interest to them at best

It's not of peripheral interest though, because an awful lot of us in
the outer boroughs work in the inner boroughs or at least travel through
them. The vast majority of my use of public transport in London is
either inside zone 1, or on the journey from home to zone 1. It's very
much in my interests for inner London to have good transport even though
I live in one of the outer boroughs. I believe that inner London would
have better transport if Bendy buses were to be got rid of.

--
David Cantrell | Reality Engineer, Ministry of Information

PLEASE NOTE: This message was meant to offend everyone equally,
regardless of race, creed, sexual orientation, politics, choice
of beer, operating system, mode of transport, or their editor.